Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
In this issue:
Volume 27, No. 1Spring 2001JOIDES Journal
Joint Oceanographic Institutionsfor Deep Earth Sampling
The High-Arctic Drilling Challenge:Excerpts from the Final Reportof the Arctic’s Role inGlobal ChangeProgramPlanningGroup
Welcome from the Miami
JOIDES Office
Leg 187Science Report
The ODP/IODPTransition
IODPPrinciples
First IODP Callfor Proposals
Figure 2. A global compilation of deep-sea isotope records (Cibicidoides and Nuttallides). The records are based on benthic
foraminifera isotope data from 50 DSDP and ODP sites. The raw data were smoothed using a 5 point running mean. The curve fits
are locally weighted means. For the carbon isotope record, separate curve fits are presented for the Atlantic and Pacific to show the
effects of basin-to-basin fractionation after 15 Ma. Also shown are the major tectonic, climatic, and biotic events of the Cenozoic
(Zachos et al. submitted).
Panel Report:Excerpts from the Final Report of the Arctic’sRole in Global Change Program Planning Group
In this issue from pages 7 - 20:
Figure 1. Regions in the Arctic Ocean targeted for ocean drilling are
superimposed on the new IBCAO (International Bathymetric Chart of
the Arctic Ocean; Jakobsson et al., 2000) map.
Figure Caption for the Front Cover Illustration:
-10123450
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Mio
cene
Olig
ocen
eE
ocen
ePa
leoc
ene
Plio
.Plt.
Age(Ma)
δ18O δ13C0 1 2 3
4°0° 8° 12°Ice-free Temperature (°C)
Small-ephemeralice-sheets appear
N. H
emisphere Ice-sheets
Late PaleoceneThermal Maximum
Oi-1 Glaciation
Mi-1Glaciation
Tasmania-AntarcticPassage opens
Drake Passage opens
N. Atlanticrifting & volcanism
India-Asia collide
Panama Seaway closes
E. EoceneClimatic Optimum
Late Oligocenewarming
Mid-MioceneClimatic Optimum
Benthic foraminiferaextinction &
land mammalmigrations
Coralmass extinction
Baleen whalesappear
Columbia Rivervolcanism
C4 grassesexpand
Antarctic Ice-sheets
N. Hemisphereglaciation
Humans in Africa
ClimateEvents
K/T mass
TectonicEvents
BioticEvents
Acceleration ofEurasian Tibetan
Plateau uplift
Asian monsoonsintensify
First hominids
W. Antarctic ice-sheet
E. Antarctic ice-sheet
Meteor impact
-1
Full Scale and PermanentPartial or Ephemeral
Major platereorganization &
reduction in seafloorspreading rates
Plate reorganization& Andean uplift
extinctions
JOIDES Journal 1
TABLEOF
CONTENTS
Volume 27, No. 1Spring 2001
In this issue:
WELCOME
SCIENCE -Leg Report
PLANNING -PPG Report
ODP/IODP
The TransitionPeriod
Meeting Report
News and
Announcements
A Message from the Director of the
Miami JOIDES Office ................................................................................ 2
ODP Leg 187: Mantle Reservoirs and Mantle
Migration in the Australian-Antarctic Discordance ................................... 3
The High Arctic Drilling Challenge: Excerpts from
the Final Report of the Arctic’s Role in Global Change
Program Planning Group (APPG) .............................................................. 7
The Proposal Process During the ODP-IODP Transition ......................... 20
Formation of Interim Science Advisory Structure (iSAS) for IODP ....... 21
iSAS Implementation: 2001 Timeline .................................................... 22
Nomination Process for iSAS ................................................................... 22
Formation of an iSAS Office ..................................................................... 23
iSAS Office Contact Information ............................................................. 23
Call for Proposals: The Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP) ........ 24
Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Principles ......................................... 25
Alternate Drilling Platforms - Europe as the Third Leg of IODP ........... 28
Geoscience Initiatives: MARGINS, JEODI ............................................. 30
Upcoming Meetings: Ophiolites at GSA 2001; EMMM 2002 ................. 31
Guidelines for JOIDES Journal Contributions .......................................... 32
1 Port calls are scheduled for 5 days at the beginning of the listed dates. However, the ship sails when ready.2 A mid-leg port call will occur for Leg 196 and may occur for Leg 204.3 Leg 205 is tentatively scheduled to end in Panama City, Panama. 14 May 2001
JOIDES Resolution Operations Schedule: January 2001 - November 2002
geL noitanitseDtroP
)nigirO(setaD 1 syaDlatoT
)aeS/troP(feihC-oCstsitneicS
UMATtcatnoC
491 uaetalPnoiraM ellivsnwoT hcraM5-yraunaJ6 )35/5(85 nresI.A,ittemlesnA.F mulB.P
591 noIcificaP.W/anairaM mauG yaM3-hcraM5 )45/5(95 arahonihS.M,yrubsilaS.M rethciR.C
691 IIiaknaN gnuleeK yluJ2-yaM3 )55/5(06 erooM.C&,adakiM.H,rekceB.K sualK.A
791 stopstoH amahokoY tsuguA82-yluJ2 )25/5(75 onudraT.J,nacnuD.R notcA.G
891 esiRykstahS amahokoY rebotcO42-tsuguA82 )25/5(75 avliSilomerP.I,rewolarB.T enolaM.M
991 cificaPenegoelaP ululonoH rebmeceD71-rebotcO42 )94/5(45 nosliW.P,elyL.M aitucsE.C
002 H2 yrotavresbO0 ululonoH 20'yraunaJ13-rebmeceD71 )04/5(54 arahasaK.J,nehpetS.R ecallaW.P
102 erehpsoiBureP naltazaM lirpA2-yraunaJ13 )65/5(16 nesnegroJ.B,tdnoH'D.S relliM.J
202 yhpargonaecoelaPES osiaraplaV enuJ1-lirpA2 )55/5(06 nnamedeiT.R,xiM.A mulB.P
302 aciRatsoC ytiCamanaP yluJ13-enuJ1 )55/5(06 regnilliV.H,sirroM.J sualK.A
402 setardyHsaG 2 ocsicnarFnaS rebmetpeS82-yluJ13 )45/5(95 uherT.A,nnamrhoB.G rethciR.C
502 noIcificaP.qE 3 ocsicnarFnaS rebmevoN3-rebmetpeS82 )13/5(63 ztluhcS.A,ttucrO.J notcA.G
2
WELCOME
Volume 27, No. 1Spring 2001
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
Japan. These IODP support mechanisms, described briefly in this issue, are very much in parallel to the JOIDES Advi-
sory Structure and the JOIDES Office for the Ocean Drilling Program (ODP). As the photo demonstrates, we are working
hard to ensure close coordination at all levels.
At the same time, the JOIDES sub-committee charged with planning for IODP, IPSC (or IODP Planning Sub-Committee),
has achieved a truly major milestone, publication of the Initial Science Plan (ISP) for IODP in early May. The ISP builds
on the ODP legacy, the ODP Long-Range Plan, and the CONCORD and COMPLEX reports to lay out the scientific foci
for the first ten years of the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program. IPSC and its Science Planning Working Group did a
superb job in assembling the ISP, which received outstanding reviews by blue-ribbon panels in its near-final stages. An
electronic version of the ISP is available at the IODP website, http://www.iodp.org. Paper copies can be requested from
national ODP member offices and from the iSAS Office.
If a formal IODP planning structure will phase in during 2001, what will JOIDES be doing through the end of ODP
drilling in 2003? First, the final year of ODP drilling with the JOIDES Resolution remains to be scheduled at the August
2001 SCICOM/OPCOM meetings. We are fortunate that the drilling community and JOIDES Advisory Structure have
nurtured an exceptionally strong group of proposals for the final year of ODP drilling. We can schedule only a small
number of the current proposals, but again we are fortunate, in that a new program is developing to which proposals
unscheduled by ODP can be transferred for further consideration. The process by which proposals will be transferred also
is described in this issue.
After August, 2001, when most JOIDES decisions relating to the JOIDES Resolution schedule will have been made,
JOIDES and the JOIDES Office will increasingly focus on documenting the ODP legacy - one which will not become
fully known until well after all ODP drilling is concluded. We have already started focusing on this important endeavor,
and, following a motion at the August, 2000, SCICOM meeting, we are currently developing the content for a special
issue of the JOIDES Journal later this year entitled Achievements and Opportunities of Scientific Ocean Drilling.
A Message from the Director of the Miami JOIDES Office
Keir Becker
2001 is a year of tremendous transitions in the scientific planning for ocean drilling. A primary
focus of this issue of the JOIDES Journal is to clarify these transitions for you, the ocean drilling
community. Almost as soon as the JOIDES Office rotated (probably for the last time) to the
University of Miami on January 1, plans gelled to establish an interim Science Advisory
Structure (iSAS) for the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP) served by an iSAS Office in
The JOIDES Office at the University of Miami welcomes special guest Minoru Yamakawa,
Administrator for the iSAS Office (left). Chris Harrison, EXCOM Chair, is second from left,
followed by Keir Becker, Director and SCICOM Chair; Henny Gröschel, JOIDES Journal
Editor; Elspeth Urquhart, International Liaison; and Aleksandra Janik, Science Coordinator.
Maya Becker, Executive Assistant, rounds out the group.
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1 3
SCIENCELeg Reports
ODP
ODP Leg 187: Mantle Reservoirs and Mantle Migration in theAustralian-Antarctic Discordance
David M. Christie 1, Rolf-Birger Pederson 2, D. Jay Miller 3, and theLeg 187 Scientific Party
INTRODUCTION
The Indian and Pacific Ocean Mantle
Isotopic Provinces
Mid-ocean ridge basalt (MORB) lavas erupted
at Indian Ocean spreading centers are isotopi-
cally distinct from those of the Pacific Ocean,
indicating a fundamental difference in the
composition of the underlying upper mantle.
Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean mantle
isotopic provinces are separated along the
Southeast Indian Ridge (SEIR) by a uniquely
sharp boundary that lies within the Australian-
Antarctic Discordance (AAD). This boundary,
recognized by Klein et al. (1988), was located
within 25 km by Pyle et al. (1992). Subse-
quent off-axis dredge sampling has shown that
the Pacific mantle has migrated rapidly west-
ward into the eastern AAD during at least the
last 4 m.y. (Christie et al., 1998). The principal
objective of Leg 187 was to delineate this
boundary further off-axis, and allow us to infer
its history over the last 30 m.y.
The Australian Antarctic Discordance
(AAD)
The AAD (Fig. 1; next page), at depths of 4 to
5 km, encompasses one of the deepest regions
of the global mid-oceanic spreading system. Its
anomalous depth reflects the presence of
unusually cold underlying mantle and, conse-
quently, of thin crust. The region east of the
AAD, Zone A (Fig. 1), is characterized by an
axial ridge with smooth off-axis topography
(characteristics usually associated with fast-
spreading centers), while the AAD is charac-
terized by deep axial valleys with rough off-
axis topography (characteristics usually
associated with slow spreading centers). These
______________________________________1 College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences,
Oregon State University, Ocean Admininstration
Building 104, Corvallis, OR 97331-5503 USA2 Geologisk Institut, Universititet i Bergen,
Allegaten 41, Bergen 5007, Norway3 Ocean Drilling Program, Texas A&M University,
1000 Discovery Drive, College Station, TX 77845-
9547 USA
morphological contrasts are paralleled by
distinct contrasts in the nature and variability
of basaltic lava compositions. They reflect
fundamental contrasts in the thermal regime of
the spreading center.
Mantle Flow and the Isotopic Boundary
The AAD is the focus of converging
asthenospheric mantle flows, suggested by
multiple episodes of ridge propagation from
both east and west toward the AAD. Numeri-
cal models suggest that convergent, subaxial
mantle flow is an inevitable consequence of
gradients in axial depth and upper mantle
temperature around the AAD (West, 1997).
Within 20 to 30 km of the ~126oE transform in
Segment B5, the easternmost AAD segment
(Fig. 1), a distinct discontinuity in the Sr, Nd,
and Pb isotopic signatures of axial lavas marks
the boundary between Indian Ocean and
Pacific Ocean mantle provinces. The boundary
is remarkably sharp, although lavas with
transitional characteristics occur within 50-100
km of the boundary. This boundary has
migrated westward across Segment B5 during
the last 3 to 4 m.y. (Pyle et al., 1992; Christie
et al., 1998).
Understanding the long-term relationship of
this uniquely sharp boundary between ocean-
scale upper mantle isotopic domains to the
remarkable geophysical, morphological, and
petrological features of the AAD was the
principal objective of Leg 187. The defining
characteristic of the AAD is its long-lived,
unusually deep bathymetry. The AAD is
observed as a depth anomaly that forms a
shallow west-pointing V-shape, extending from
the Australian to the Antarctic continental
margin, and cutting across the major fracture
zones that define the eastern AAD segments
(Fig. 1). This V-shape implies that the depth
anomaly has migrated westward at a long-term
rate of ~15 mm/yr, much slower than both the
recent migration of the isotopic boundary and
the majority of SEIR propagating rifts. To-
4 JOIDES Jour nal - Volume 27, No. 1
SCIENCELeg Reports
ODP
Figure 1: Regional map of the Southeast Indian Ocean (from Pyle et al., 1995) showing magnetic lineations, the Australian-Antarctic
Discordance (AAD), and DSDP sites that sampled basement (large, numbered bullseye symbols). Thin, dark V east of the AAD is the
predicted trace of a hypothetical isotopic boundary migrating at ~40 mm/yr. Broader gray V is the approximate trace of the regional
depth anomaly. Small bullseye symbols south of Australia indicate approximate positions of dredges by Lanyon et al. (1995).
150° 170°110°90°70°E 130°
Mac
quar
ie R
idge
A u s t r a l i a
A n t a r c t i c a
283282
280A
279AMacquarie
Is.
278
EmeraldBasin
BallenyIs.
274
Amsterdam Is.and
St. Paul Is.
Heard Is.
Kerguelen Is.
TasmanSea
264
265
266
267
AAD
S. TasmanRise
NaturalistePlateau
WhartonBasin
Broken Ridge
90° E . Ridge
Tasmania
30°S
40°
50°
60°
30°S
40°
50°
60°
18
18
13
13
6
5
5
6
5
5
56
6
6
6
5
513
13
13
18
18
13
6
5
6
5
5
6
5
5
56
6
6
135
33
312420
18
18 20
243133
34
1318
18
34
6
613
5
6
1813
13
66
5
5
56
5
5
6
M0
M4
Shea t
outs
Ind ai nR dgi e
MacquarieTriple Jct.
Zone A
KerguelenPlateau
NewZealand
173.4° E
E. TasmanPlat.
LEG 187
150° 170°110°90° 130°70°E
gether with the relatively rapid northward
absolute motion of the SEIR, this V-shape
requires that the cold mantle source of the
depth anomaly be linear and oriented approxi-
mately north-south. Recently, Gurnis et al.
(1998) have suggested that the source of this
cold linear anomaly lies in a band of subducted
material that accumulated at the 660 km
mantle discontinuity beneath a long-lived
western Pacific subduction zone prior to ~100
Ma.
History of the Isotopic Boundary
Prior to Leg 187, hypotheses on the long-term
relationships between the isotopic boundary
and the morphologically defined AAD fell into
two classes, schematically illustrated in Figure
1. In the first case, the recent (0 to 4 Ma)
isotopic boundary migration reflects a local-
ized (~100 km) perturbation of a geochemical
feature permanently associated with the eastern
boundary of the AAD since the basin opened.
The boundary could be related either to the
depth anomaly (boomerang shape) or to the
eastern bounding transform (linear N-S), but
not, in the long term, to both. In the second
case, the recent migration is the culmination of
a long-lived phenomenon that only recently
brought Pacific mantle beneath the AAD. The
boundary should define a west-pointing V-
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1 5
SCIENCELeg Reports
ODP
shape at a smaller angle than the depth
anomaly. For a migration rate of 40 mm/yr,
comparable to Zone A rift propagation rates,
this hypothesis is consistent with the onset of
Pacific mantle migration 40 to 50 m.y. ago,
when the South Tasman Rise first separated
from Antarctica. This type of migration
received limited geochemical support from the
Indian and transitional isotopic signatures of
altered ~38- and ~45-Ma basalts dredged to the
north and east of the AAD by Lanyon et al.
(1995), and from 60 to 69 Ma Deep Sea
Drilling Project (DSDP) basalts that were
drilled close to Tasmania (Pyle et al., 1995).
However, neither sample set is definitive. The
dredged samples are from sites within or west
of the residual depth anomaly and therefore
support two of the three possible configura-
tions. The DSDP samples lie far to the east of
the depth anomaly, but very close to the
continental margin. Their apparent Indian
affinity is suspect because their mantle source
may have been contaminated by nearby
subcontinental lithosphere.
Subsurface Biosphere
Recent findings have extended the biosphere to
include microbial life in deep subsurface
volcanic regions of the ocean floor. Microor-
ganisms seem to play an important role in the
degradation of ocean-floor basaltic glass, and
microbes have recently been documented to
inhabit internal fracture surfaces of basaltic
glass that specifically were sampled for
microbiological studies during MIR submers-
ible dives to the Knipovich Ridge (Thorseth et
al., 1999). Dissolution textures directly be-
neath and manganese and iron precipitates
adjacent to many individual microbes suggest
that microbial activity plays an active role in
the low-temperature alteration of ocean-floor
basalts. Traces of a deep biosphere have been
documented to several hundred meters depth in
the crust by means of glass alteration/dissolu-
tion textures, DNA-staining, and carbon
isotope ratios from various ODP holes
(Thorseth et al., 1995; Torsvik et al.,1998).
So far, little is known about the nature of these
organisms. An objective of Leg 187 therefore
was to characterize and study microbes present
in the volcanic sequence of the crust and to
study the diagenetic effects of the microbial
activity.
DEVELOPMENT OF A RESPONSIVE
DRILLING STRATEGY
We developed a responsive drilling strategy
during the cruise since the possible locations of
the isotopic boundary in the 10 to 30 Ma
seafloor age range targeted for drilling covered
a very wide area. Sites were selected from a
pre-approved suite on the basis of rapid (12 to
24 hour) turnaround of shipboard geochemical
analyses. At several key points in the leg,
geochemical data were available prior to
departure from a site. These data were used to
decide the location of the next site.
Two factors were critical to the success of this
responsive strategy, which resulted in the
recovery of core from 23 holes at 13 sites with
an average water depth of almost 5 km. (In the
process, a record 140 km of drill string passed
through the drill floor.) The first factor was
identification of an element that would serve as
a reliable proxy for the Pb isotopic ratios that
distinguish the Indian and Pacific mantle
isotopic domains. The second was ensuring
the onboard availability of reliable, rapid
geochemical analyses.
Available data from 0 to 7 Ma dredged samples
revealed clear overall differences in both major
and trace elements between the lava popula-
tions of the two provinces. Few elements can
be relied on to accurately determine the
affinity of any individual lava. Two elemental
plots that reliably assigned >90% of our 0 to 7
Ma archival collection are Ba vs. Zr/Ba and
MgO vs. Na2O/TiO2. The latter proved not to
be a useful discriminant for drilled samples.
Reliable measurement of these elements on
the JOIDES Resolution required the installa-
tion of an Inductively Coupled Plasma -
Atomic Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-AES)
instrument. This installation, already in the
planning stages, was accelerated through the
heroic efforts of Rick Murray and the coopera-
tion of several ODP-TAMU and JOI staff. The
instrument performed well throughout the leg.
6 JOIDES Jour nal - Volume 27, No. 1
SCIENCELeg Reports
ODP
RESULTS
Locating the Isotopic Mantle Province
Boundary
Shipboard analytical data were used to deter-
mine the configuration of the Indian-Pacific
mantle isotopic boundary north of the AAD
from 10 to 30 Ma. A Ba vs. Zr/Ba plot for
shipboard samples that was used to discrimi-
nate between Indian and Pacific mantle
domains is shown in Figure 2 (see color plate
inside the back cover). Shipboard results have
been confirmed by onshore isotopic analyses
(Fig. 3; see color plate inside the back cover).
The migration of a discrete isotopic boundary
across the easternmost AAD over the last 3 to
4 Ma appears to be a transient phenomenon.
We believe we have identified at least one
similar migration event in western Zone A at
about 19 Ma (Site 1158). Over the long term,
the Indian-Pacific boundary coincides with the
eastern side of the regional depth anomaly, and
a transitional region within the depth appears
to be dominated by Indian-type mantle with
common, discrete occurrences of transitional
lavas. Along the eastern boundary of the depth
anomaly in western Zone A, Pacific- and
Indian-type mantle domains appear to alternate
on a time and spatial scale that is comparable
to present-day migration in Segment B5 (Fig.
3). In at least one case, this alternation appears
to represent a short-lived incursion of Pacific
mantle into the depth anomaly coinciding with
the arrival of a westward propagating rift.
Characterizing the Biosphere of Deep
Oceanic Crust
Microbial enrichment cultures, chemical
analysis of metabolic products and 16S-r DNA
sequencing of samples recovered from Leg
187 basalts have shown the presence of iron-
and manganese-oxidizing and reducing
bacteria, methanotrophic bacteria and
methanogenic Archaea. The microorganisms
found in the basalt samples are different from
microorganisms found in sediment and water
samples. Leg 187 was therefore a successful
first step in the process of characterizing the
deep biosphere of the oceanic crust.
LEG 187 SCIENTIFIC PARTY
David M. Christie, Co-Chief Scientist; Rolf -
Birger Pedersen, Co-Chief Scientist; D. Jay
Miller, Staff Scientist; Vaughn G. Balzer,
Florence Einaudi, M. A. Mary Gee, Folkmar
Hauff, Pamela D. Kempton, Wen-Tzong
Liang, Kristine Lysnes, Christine M. Meyzen,
Douglas G. Pyle, Christopher J. Russo, Hiroshi
Sato, Ingunn H. Thorseth.
REFERENCES
Alvarez, W., 1990. Geologic evidence for the plate
driving mechanism: The continental undertow
hypothesis and the Australian-Antarctic Discor-
dance. Tectonics, 9:1213-1220.
Christie, D.M., West, B.P., Pyle, D.G., and Hanan,
B., 1998. Chaotic topography, mantle flow and
mantle migration in the Australian-Antarctic
Discordance: Nature, 394:637-644.
Cochran, J.R., Sempéré, J.-C. and others, 1997. The
Southeast Indian Ridge between 88°E and
118°E: Gravity anomalies and crustal accretion
at intermediate spreading rates. J. Geophys. Res.,
102: 15463-15487.
Gurnis, M., Muller, R.D., and Moresi, L.,1998.
Cretaceous vertical motion of Australia and the
Australian-Antarctic Discordance. Science,
279:1499-1504.
Klein, E.M., Langmuir, C.H., Zindler, A., Staudigel,
H., and Hamelin, B., 1988. Isotope evidence of a
mantle convection boundary at the Australian-
Antarctic discordance. Nature, 333:623-62.
Lanyon, R., Crawford, A.J., and Eggins, S., 1995.
Westward migration of Pacific Ocean upper
mantle into the Southern Ocean region between
Australia and Antarctica. Geology, 23:511-514.
Pyle, D.G., Christie, D.M., and Mahoney, J.J.,
1992. Resolving an isotopic boundary within the
Australian-Antarctic Discordance. Earth Planet.
Sci. Lett., 112:161-178.
Pyle, D.G., Christie, D.M., Mahoney, J.J., and
Duncan, R.A., 1995. Geochemistry and geochro-
nology of ancient southeast Indian and south-
west Pacific seafloor, J. Geophys. Res.,
100:22,261-22,282.
Continued on page 27
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
7
Panel Reports
ODPIODP
EXCECUTIVE SUMMARY
Global climate models demonstrate the sensi-
tivity of the polar areas to changes in forcing
of the ocean/climate system. The presence or
absence of snow and ice influences global heat
distribution through its effect on the albedo,
and the polar oceans are the source of dense,
cold bottom waters which influence thermoha-
line circulation in the world oceans. In spite of
the critical role of the Arctic Ocean in climate
evolution, only very little material from the
Cenozoic is represented in available high-
latitude core material. This lack of data repre-
sents one of the largest information gaps in
modern Earth Science.
Key scientific questions to be addressed by
dedicated Arctic scientific drilling include:
• The response of the Arctic during periods of
extreme polar warmth;
• Variations in the physical and chemical
characteristics of the water mass in an
evolving polar deep ocean basin, and the
__________________________________1 Statoil (Stavanger, Norway)2 Stockholm University (Stockholm, Sweden)3 Tulane University (New Orleans, LA USA)4 U.S. Geological Survey (Denver, CO USA)5 Old Dominion University (Norfolk, VA USA)6 IFREMER (Brest, France)7 Geotek Ltd. (UK)8 Aquatic Company (Russia)9 Murmansk, Russia10 Alfred Wegener Institut (Germany)11 University College London (London, UK)12 Universititet i Bergen (Bergen, Norway)13 Kyushu University (Japan)14 Alfred Wegener Institut (Germany)15 Department of Fisheries & Oceans (Canada)16 University of California (Santa Cruz, CA USA)
oceanographic response to opening of
gateways;
• The history of marine polar biota and
fertility;
• The history of Arctic sea ice;
• Ice rafting and the history of local vs.
regional ice sheet developments;
• Processes of methane release of destabilized
permafrost associated gas hydrate accumu-
lations;
• The history of emplacement of Large
Igneous Provinces (LIPs) in the Arctic
Ocean and their environmental impact.
The Arctic’s Role in Global Change Program
Planning Group (APPG) concludes that:
• Scientific drilling can be carried out in
permanently ice-covered areas of the Arctic
Ocean without harm to the environment. In
the short-term (3 to 5 years), this can be
achieved with present technology, and the
potential for scientific rewards are high.
• An Arctic scientific drilling campaign
should start as soon as possible to begin a
long-term program in a climatically impor-
tant, but largely unknown, ocean.
• In preparation for a long-term drilling
program in the high Arctic, new geophysical
drill site selection data are needed urgently.
Site survey data for the definition of drilling
targets in the short (3 to 5 years) time frame
exist from sections of the Yermak Plateau,
Lomonosov Ridge and the Chukchi Plateau
(Fig. 1; see front cover).
The High-Arctic Drilling Challenge: Excerpts from the FinalReport of the Arctic’s Role in Global Change Program PlanningGroup (APPG)
Martin Hovland (Chair) 1, Jan Backman 2, Bernard Coakley 3, TimothyCollett 4, Dennis Darby 5, Jean Paul Foucher 6, Tim Francis 7, MikhailGelfgat 8, Anatoly Gorshkovsky 9, Wilfred Jokat 10, Michael Kaminski 11,Yngve Kristoffersen 12, Kozo Takahashi 13, Jörn Thiede 14, Chris Wiley 15,and James Zachos 16
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING8
Panel Reports
ODPIODP
• Stationary marine operations in drifting sea-
ice require careful ice management, which
combines modelling icebreaker perfor-
mance, ice reconnaissance studies (weather
forecasting, radar imaging, and ice floe
tracking), and icebreaker operations.
• Proven systems for drilling single-bit holes
should be utilized in the short-term. As
operational experience is gained, the system
capability can be expanded to include re-
entry and multi-cased boreholes with
instrumentation.
• A long-term drilling commitment in the
central deep Arctic, where drilling targets of
high scientific priority are located, will
ideally require a large icebreaker with deep-
water drilling capability. A feasibility study
for such a vessel is recommended.
MANDATE AND OVERALL GOALS SET
BY SCICOM IN 1999
Motion 99-1-6 of the JOIDES Science Com-
mittee (SCICOM) defines the following
mandate and overall goal for the APPG:
Mandate
1. Design a scientific drilling strategy to
investigate the role of the Arctic in influenc-
ing the global climate system. Besides
climatic and paleoceanographic studies, this
strategy may also address those aspects of
the Arctic’s tectonic development and
magmatic history that may have signifi-
cantly affected global climate or that may
otherwise relate to globally important
problems.
2. Summarize the technical needs, opportuni-
ties, and limitations of drilling in the Arctic.
3. Encourage and nurture the development of
drilling proposals.
Overall Goal
The overall objective of the APPG was to
develop a mature science plan concerning
those aspects of Arctic drilling that bear on
global problems, particularly with respect to
the climate system on time scales from decades
to millions of years. The panel consisted
partly of Nansen Arctic Drilling (NAD)
scientists, and used the existing NAD Imple-
mentation Plan as a basis for the AAPG plan.
In order to meet this goal and fulfill its man-
date, the APPG had three meetings, in
Stavanger, Norway (March 2000); Calgary,
Canada (June 2000); and Stockholm, Sweden
(January 2001). This report contains contribu-
tions by the APPG members and others, and
was completed in March 2001.
SCIENTIFIC OBJECTIVES
Introduction
Earth’s climate has undergone a significant and
complex evolution, the finer details of which
are just becoming evident through investiga-
tions of deep-sea sediment cores (Fig. 2; see
color plate inside the front cover). This
evolution includes gradual trends of warming
and cooling driven by tectonic processes on
time scales of 105-107 year, rhythmic or peri-
odic cycles driven by orbital processes with
104-106 year cyclicity, and rare rapid aberrant
shifts and extreme climate transients with
durations of 103-105 years. This history has
been determined largely through investigations
of cores recovered from the world’s oceans by
the Deep Sea Drilling Project (DSDP) and the
Ocean Drilling Program (ODP). Cores from
the high latitude southern oceans, where
signals of climatic change tend to be amplified,
were particularly useful.
Very little is known about signals of climatic
change in the Arctic Ocean. This represents a
major and unacceptable gap in the global
paleoclimatic database. What little information
is available on Arctic paleoclimates comes
from a few piston cores, exploration wells, and
land-based marine outcrops. While these
provide glimpses of climate signals for a few
brief intervals, the lack of continuous sediment
records severely limits efforts to establish a
chronologic sequence of climate and environ-
mental change for this important region. In
essence, the history of Arctic climate and
Arctic Ocean circulation is so poorly known
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
9
Panel Reports
ODPIODP
that we view the recovery of any material as a
major advance that will, by definition, increase
our knowledge and understanding of this
critical region.
Paleoclimate and Paleoceanography
Questions
A number of specific questions must be
addressed in order to understand the influence
of the Arctic on global climate change on all
time scales, from tectonic to millennial. In
summary, these questions are:
• What is the history of Arctic sea ice? When
did perennial sea ice first appear in the
Arctic? Has it appeared and then disap-
peared on more than one occasion? Under
what circumstances did this pack-ice form
or disappear?
• When did the first circum-Arctic ice-sheets
appear? Once established, what was the
history of growth and decay of these cyclic
ice-sheets?
• How has the circulation and stratification of
Arctic water masses evolved over the
Cenozoic? How have changes in Arctic
water mass characteristics influenced global
thermohaline circulation (intermediate or
deep water)?
• What was the nature of the Arctic environ-
ment during periods of extreme global
warmth?
• Have there been major changes in the
biogeochemical cycles of the Arctic, par-
ticularly those affecting methane hydrates?
• What is the history of marine polar biota
and fertility?
• How has the tectonic evolution of the basin
influenced regional and global climate?
The Search for Answers: Arctic and
Global Climate
The Arctic Ocean plays a fundamental role in
the global ocean/climate system as the primary
heat sink of the northern hemisphere. It is a
source of cold, dense intermediate and bottom
waters to most of the world’s oceans. The
permanent sea-ice cover has a tremendous
influence on Earth’s albedo, atmospheric
circulation, and distribution of fresh water. Its
variation both seasonally and over longer time
periods thus has a direct effect on global heat
distribution, climate, nutrients, biota, and
sediments. Whether the Arctic Ocean influ-
ences changes in global climate, or how it
responds to these changes, is unclear.
Perennial Sea-Ice History
The factors that control sea-ice thickness andextent are poorly understood. However, their
influences are manifested through 1) changes
in albedo, 2) water-column stability and
bottom-water formation, 3) ocean/atmosphere
heat and evaporative exchange, and 4) bio-
productivity and carbon sinks. The distribution
of perennial sea-ice is tied to several global
boundary conditions including temperature,
salinity, and atmospheric and oceanic circula-
tion. We know that this pack-ice cover is
sensitive to at least some of these conditions
on decadal time scales (Cavaleri et al., 1997;
Proshutinsky and Johnson, 1997). Establishing
the initiation of Arctic perennial ice cover
would permit correlation to global climate
changes and thus a clearer understanding of the
climate system. In this regard, when did
perennial sea-ice cover develop? Under what
boundary conditions did it develop, and
disappear? Are fluctuations in sea-ice cover
linked to growth and decay of continental ice?
What is the climatic feedback from an evolv-
ing ice pack in amplifying polar cooling by
increasing albedo and restricting ocean-
atmosphere heat transfer?
To accomplish this objective, the ridges in the
central Arctic Ocean need to be cored, espe-
cially in areas where sedimentation rates may
be high (>1 cm/kyr). While seasonal ice would
occur in the periphery of the Arctic Ocean,
only the central Arctic would record perennial
pack-ice.
Circum-Arctic Ice-sheet Evolution
The evolution of Northern Hemisphere glacia-
tion is complex. There is little doubt about the
scale and timing of the major glacial cycles of
the Pleistocene, which are well constrained
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING10
Panel Reports
ODPIODP
from both direct and indirect evidence (i.e.,
oxygen isotopes). In addition, the pre-
Pleistocene evolution of the Greenland ice-
sheets is known from the results of ODP
exploration in the Nordic seas. What remains
unclear is the pre-Pliocene evolution of
small-scale ice-sheets. For example, when did
the first ice-sheets form, and what was their
extent? Were they ephemeral?
Several major ice-sheets calved icebergs into
the Arctic Ocean, as evidenced by the ice-
rafted detritus (IRD) record (Polyak et al.,
1995; Bischof and Darby, 1997; Phillips and
Grantz, 1997). The timing, causes, and
consequences of the repeated growth and
decay of these ice-sheets throughout their
history must be closely linked to global
climate. For example, are the growth and
decay of the ice-sheets synchronous with sub-
polar ice-sheets such as the Laurentide ice-
sheet that collapsed periodically to produce
Heinrich events in the North Atlantic?
In order to expand the late Pleistocene record
of the Arctic ice-sheet evolution, we recom-
mend drilling the continental slopes offshore
of the known margins of these ice-sheets. For
example, the slope off McClure Straits should
contain a complete record of that portion of
the Laurentide ice-sheet that calved into the
Arctic Ocean. Similar areas offshore of the
Innuitian and Barents Sea ice-sheets also
should be targeted. In addition, sections of the
Lomonosov Ridge that would intersect drift
tracks of icebergs from the Canadian ice-
sheets should be a prime target for obtaining
the history of these ice-sheets.
Circulation/Stratification of the ArcticOcean
The series of interconnected basins compris-
ing the Nordic Seas contain about 0.7% of the
volume of the World Ocean, excluding the
Amerasian Basin of the Arctic Ocean. Despite
the small volume of these areas, they act as a
primary source of a large portion of deep,
ventilated waters in the World Ocean. Also,
the export of ventilated deep waters to the
Atlantic via the Fram Strait is compensated
by a corresponding import of relatively warm
and saline surface waters of Atlantic origin
(Aagaard et al., 1985). The Arctic Ocean is
hence commonly described as one of the lungs
of the deep global ocean, the other being the
Weddell Sea. The tectonic development and
opening of the Fram Strait has determined the
history of water mass exchange between the
Arctic Ocean and the World Ocean, as the
strait is the only deep connection between the
Arctic and all other oceans. The initial opening
of the Fram Strait may have occurred as early
as late Eocene, some 35 million years ago.
An understanding of the exchange of water
masses between the Arctic Ocean and the
world ocean is an essential element in mod-
elling the change in global oceanographic
conditions over the past ~40 Myr. Such models
require knowledge about, for example, when
bottom water formation began in the Arctic,
how chemical and physical characteristics of
this water mass varied through time, and which
cause and effect relationships governed the
development of the Arctic water masses.
Extreme Warmth and the Arctic
Another important challenge in paleoclimatol-
ogy/paleoceanography is to develop a quantita-
tive understanding of the mechanisms respon-
sible for maintaining the extreme polar warmth
observed for the Eocene and older and younger
intervals. Seven key time intervals of extreme
warmth can be examined in the Arctic: The
Aptian-Albian, early Eocene, middle Miocene,
early Pliocene, MIS 11, Cenomanian, and late
Paleocene. What was the climate of the Arctic
during these periods? Studies of terrestrial
floras suggest mean annual temperatures as
high as 13oC during the Cenomanian green-
house conditions (Spicer et al., 1999). What
was the circulation and fertility of this open
basin? Was there sea-ice during the Neogene
warm intervals? Perhaps the most extreme
greenhouse interval is the late Paleocene
Thermal Maximum (LPTM). This event,
which could have been driven by the release
and oxidation of methane from clathrates, is
characterized by as much as 8oC of warming in
the high southern latitudes. What was the
response of the Arctic to this warming?
At present, the existing climate proxy data for
the Arctic are at odds with paleoclimate
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
11
Panel Reports
ODPIODP
simulations (e.g., General Circulation Models,
or GCMs) that produce polar regions charac-
terized by sub-freezing temperatures and
significant seasonality. Yet the fossil record
suggests mild climates characterized by
winters with rare sub-freezing conditions. The
reasons for the GCM/data discrepancies are
not known. In terms of the dynamics of
maintaining extreme polar warmth, climatolo-
gists have focused on heat transport processes
as well as the effects of greenhouse gases
(Lyle, 1997). Simulations made to test the
effects of increased oceanic heat transport on
high latitude climates have found this to be
inadequate for sustaining polar warmth. The
presence of a large body of water with its
attendant heat capacity should have a major
influence on daily and seasonal high latitude
temperatures, although the impact of this
quantity requires additional testing. One
potential solution to the high-latitude warmth
paradigm may involve the generation of polar-
stratospheric clouds, which tend to insulate the
poles, by methane.
The Search for Answers: Evolution of
Polar Biota
What little we know about the composition of
the Arctic floras and faunas is largely derived
from isolated studies of the shallow-marine
assemblages in the onshore sediments of Arctic
Canada, Spitsbergen, the Pechora Basin,
Western Siberia, and a few piston cores on the
Alpha Ridge. Mesozoic microfossils (mostly
foraminifera and palynomorphs) have been
studied from Siberia (Azbel et al., 1991),
Canada (Hedinger, 1993), and Spitsbergen.
Cenozoic foraminifera and palynological
assemblages have been studied in offshore
exploration wells in the Beaufort-MacKenzie
Basin (McNeil, 1989; 1997). These data
provide at least some insight into the nature of
Arctic marine faunas.
A number of questions remain to be answered.
What is the taxonomic composition of polar
marine faunas and floras? Is there any evi-
dence for the bipolarity of polar faunas? Can
we establish a workable microfossil
biochronology for the Arctic that can be used
for correlation purposes? Given the endemic
nature of floras and faunas reported from the
Arctic, to what extent has the Arctic fauna and
flora evolved in isolation from the world
ocean? Has the Arctic served as a refugium for
species that suffered extinction elsewhere?
Can we use the microfossil record of the Arctic
as a proxy of water mass properties and
productivity, or do we need to develop new
proxies? Can we use fauna and flora to inter-
pret the circulation history of the Arctic
basins? What role has the Arctic Ocean played
in the origin of cosmopolitan oceanic faunas
and floras, and terrestrial biota? To what extent
is the evolution of polar marine faunas and
floras influenced by the evolution of the
cryosphere? To what extent can we use the
siliceous faunas and floras to interpret the
history of sea-ice formation in the Arctic?
The Search for Answers: Arctic
Gateways and Basin Evolution
The tectonic environment of the Arctic Ocean
changed dramatically during the Mesozoic-
Cenozoic. The Cenozoic opening of sea-
gateways, especially Fram Strait, favored the
formation of continental ice-sheets and sea-ice
cover in the Arctic. The opening of these
gateways may have played a key role in
allowing a substantial decrease in the mean
average temperature to that of the present day.
Knowledge of this history can only be obtained
by sampling the rocks and sediment of the
Arctic gateways.
For most of the Mesozoic, the Arctic Ocean
consisted of an isolated deep-sea area with no
major deep-water connection to the other
oceans. Current models suggest that the oldest
Arctic deep-sea basin (Canada Basin) opened
in the Cretaceous (Vogt et al., 1979). Although
this model is widely accepted, details of the
Mesozoic evolution of the Arctic are very
sketchy. Cenozoic spreading at Gakkel Ridge
explains the opening of the Eurasian Basin and
its relationship to the Lomonosov Ridge,
whereas the nature of the Alpha-Mendeleev
Ridge in the Amerasian Basin, as well as the
age of the surrounding deep-sea basins, are not
known. The most important question to be
addressed for the Cenozoic history is “when
did the Arctic gateways open?” A number of
key areas need to be investigated to unravel the
geological history of the high Arctic.
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING12
Panel Reports
ODPIODP
The Alpha-Mendeleev Ridge is the single
largest submarine feature in the Arctic Ocean.
One model suggests the ridge complex may
represent a Cretaceous LIP, and there is some
supporting evidence in the form of terrestrial
Cretaceous continental flood basalts exposed
along part of the Arctic Ocean margins. Recent
geological and geophysical investigations
support this idea, and the few dredged lavas
have strong affinities to continental tholeiites
(Muehe and Jokat, 1999). Seismic investiga-
tions show that Alpha Ridge is mostly covered
by a sedimentary sequence up to 1 km thick
(Hall, 1979; Jackson, 1985; Jokat et al., 1999).
Shallow cores confirmed that Cretaceous
sediments are present (Clark et al., 1986). This
area represents a unique opportunity to obtain
a complete record of the post-Paleozoic history
of the high-Arctic Ocean.
It has been suggested that the Lomonosov
Ridge is a continental fragment rifted from the
Barents-Kara Sea margin. Seismic reflection
data across the ridge show a continuous cover
of flat-lying pelagic sediments on the ridge
top, underlain by sediment-filled half grabens
and diverging reflections (Jokat et al., 1992).
The sediments beneath the Cenozoic pelagic
section represent the only preserved Mesozoic
record from this margin, which comprises one
bondary of the Amerasian Basin. Drilling
through the unconformity will constrain the
development of this passive margin and
provide age constraints for rifting of the
Eurasian Basin.
The Gakkel Ridge is unique among ocean
ridges for its very slow spreading rate. The
lavas, their periodotitic melt residues, and the
direct interaction of mantle rocks with
seawater all hold important information that
can add significantly to our understanding of
global mid-ocean ridge spreading systems
(Hellebrand et al., in press; Muehe et al.,
1997). The drilling objectives here are to
obtain relatively fresh basement samples from
beneath the sediment-covered central and
eastern portions of the ridge, and to establish
the depth and extent of crust/mantle-seawater
chemical and thermal interactions on the ridge.
Geophysical data suggest that the Morris Jesup
Rise and the northern section of the Yermak
Plateau represent an oceanic LIP which once
formed an Iceland-like massif at the junction
of the North American/Greenland and Euro-
pean plates. These features are presumably
underlain by oceanic crust. Knowledge of the
origin of these plateaus is essential for under-
standing the opening of the Fram Strait, and
also for reconstructing the opening history of
the Eurasian Basin.
The Amerasian Basin probably formed when
Arctic Alaska rotated away from Arctic
Canada during the Mesozoic, and the Chukchi
Borderland is thought to be of continental
origin (Grantz et al., 1999). However, the
limited geological and geophysical data from
these margins and the Canada Basin is insuffi-
cient to test this hypothesis. Furthermore, this
simplistic model fails to explain either Alpha
Ridge or the Chukchi Cap region.
Marine connections between the Arctic and
other oceans during the Cretaceous were
maintained through the Western Interior
Seaway. During the early Paleogene, in
contrast, the connections with the Tethys via
Turgai Strait in Western Siberia were intermit-
tent. The two modern Arctic gateways, Fram
Strait and Bering Strait, developed as a result
of later plate motions, and have since been
influenced by vertical motions, volcanism, and
sea-level changes. The development of these
gateways has had a profound impact on global
oceanic circulation, and it is clear that an
understanding of their tectonic evolution
urgently requires further dredging, geophysical
investigation, and drilling.
Potential for High Resolution Coring in
the Arctic Ocean
The paleoclimate studies dealing with rapid
climate change and short-lived climatic events
require cores from areas with high sedimenta-
tion rates in the Arctic Ocean. In order to
resolve changes such as Dansgaard-Oeschger
events on the 1.5 kyr frequency, deposition
rates of at least several cm/yr are needed, and
rates >10 cm/yr are highly desirable. Many
processes other than paleoclimate are unique to
the Arctic, such as sea ice-rafting from shelf to
shelf across thousands of kilometers of ocean
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
13
Panel Reports
ODPIODP
(Bischof and Darby, 1997). Such records also
could be useful for investigations of biogenic
and nutrient paleo-fluxes in the Arctic Ocean,
especially those from the shelves to the basins.
Other aspects to investigate with high-resolu-
tion records are the ventilation of the deep
Arctic Ocean, the impact of fresh water fluxes,
and the effect of sea ice formation on the
stability of the Arctic pack-ice. Potential
locations for high-resolution sediment records
in the Arctic Ocean are reviewed below.
Continental Slopes
The most promising areas for both highsedimentation marine records and adequate
amounts of biogenic proxies are the continen-
tal slopes in certain areas. The margins of the
Arctic Ocean have the thinnest pack-ice and
probably the shortest intervals of low produc-
tivity in the past. Aside from the problem of
downslope transport from the shallow shelf or
terrigenous sources swamping the marine
signal, these locations offer the potential for a
compromise between continuous deposition
above 10 cm/kyr and adequate amounts of
biogenic proxies. Most of these slopes have
contour currents that could generate drift
deposits with high sedimentation rates. Many
canyons cut these slopes and high rates of
downslope sediment transport and deposition
should occur in fans or deltas associated with
these canyons. While these may have a high
proportion of terrigenous input, they do
provide high resolution.
Not all continental slopes are equally promis-
ing. Slopes with good potential for high
resolution cores with abundant proxies are the
slopes off the Laptev, Chukchi, and Kara Seas
(especially in and around the Santa Anna
Trough). The Laptev Sea continental slope
should contain a record of the western Russian
Arctic Ocean, as well as a signal from the
Lena, Ob and Yenisey Rivers and other impor-
tant Russian rivers (Kassens et al., 1999; Stein
and Fahl, 2000; Stein, in press). The Kara and
Barents Sea slopes leading into the depths of
the eastern Arctic Ocean should contain an
excellent detailed record of former ice-sheets
on these shelf areas (Stein et al., 1994). These
fluvial signals are important to both paleocli-
matology and paleoceanography. The Chukchi
Sea continental slope should provide a marine
record of the western Amerasian Arctic Ocean
as well as the Bering Strait influx from the
north Pacific. The Kara Sea continental slope
should provide a marine record for the eastern
Arctic Ocean and the influx of North Atlantic
water that enters the Arctic Ocean via the
Barents Sea. This later location could be
critical for understanding the North Atlantic
Oscillation and its potential relationship with
Arctic paleoclimate changes.
Central Arctic Ocean Ridges
Three sub-parallel ridge systems of different
age, origin, and morphology in the central
Arctic Ocean are the Alpha-Mendeleev, the
Lomonosov, and the Gakkel Ridges. Abundant
graben features on each of these ridge systems
should support conditions for ponded sediment
and higher sedimentation rates. In addition,
locations exist where contour currents or
geostrophic currents such as the North Atlantic
Intermediate Water spill over these ridges in
less than 1000 meters water depth. These
afford the opportunity for drift deposits and
thus high sedimentation rates. Seismic evi-
dence on the Lomonosov Ridge suggests a
two-fold thickening of the Tertiary sediment
package in some areas (Jokat, 1999; Jokat et
al., 1999). In addition, the Northwind Ridge/
Chukchi Plateau area offers potential coring
sites close to open water or favorable ice
conditions in most summers Because of the
generally thicker pack-ice conditions in the
Amerasian half of the Arctic Ocean, the Alpha-
Mendeleev Ridge and, to a large extent, the
Lomonosov Ridge have a lower potential for
good biogenic proxy accumulations. Parts of
the Gakkel Ridge should not be as severely
affected by pack-ice and thus could have a
much better proxy record than the other two
ridges (Stein et al., 1994).
Deep Arctic Basins
While normal pelagic deposition occurs in the
deep Arctic basins (e.g., core 94BC20; Darby
et al., 1997), these basins are dominated by
turbidite sequences (Campbell and Clark,
1977; Darby et al., 1989). The deposition rates
for the normal pelagic sediment in these basins
is usually no higher than on adjacent ridges
(Darby et al., 1997). There are some excep-
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING14
Panel Reports
ODPIODP
tions where sedimentation rates of normal
pelagic sediments were found to be up to 3.2
cm/kyr in the Canada Basin (Grantz et al.,
1999). Turbidite sequences have sedimentation
rates of 145 cm/kyr; however, these areas
should have a low priority for high resolution
coring unless a method to interpret turbidite
sequences for paleoclimatic or paleoceano-
graphic problems can be developed. Turbidite
sequences do preserve a good record of the
sporadic flux of sediment off the shelves or
from large rivers (e.g., the Mackenzie fan). The
main problems are the sporadic nature of
turbidite deposition, and establishing a good
stratigraphy without having to date nearly
every turbidite layer.
Gas Hydrates in the Arctic
The distribution of gas hydrate in marine
Arctic environments is poorly documented.
Conditions exist for gas hydrate to occur with
permafrost on submerged continental shelves
of the circum-Arctic sedimentary basin, much
like their terrestrial counterparts (Kvenvolden
and Grantz, 1990; Max and Lowrie, 1992).
Gas hydrate also may be present in deep
marine Arctic basins, as suggested by recent
observations of bottom-simulating reflectors
(BSR) on seismic lines through the Alpha and
Lomonosov Ridges (Jokat, 1999). The amount
of methane trapped in gas hydrate is perhaps
3,000 times the amount contained in the
atmosphere. A large portion of this methane
reservoir is associated with permafrost and
located on the Arctic continental shelf.
Of particular relevance to global climatic
change is whether large quantities of methane
could be released to the water column, and
ultimately to the atmosphere, as a consequence
of destabilization of gas hydrate present in
seafloor sediments. The exact link between
global warming and gas hydrate dissociation
still is debated. The Arctic continental shelf is
a unique site to document the ongoing process
of methane release from gas hydrate dissocia-
tion. Methane release to the atmosphere may
have been active on the extensive Arctic
continental shelf since the end of Pleistocene
glaciation, when submergence of the shelf
considerably increased the temperature at the
sediment surface. This would have produced
progressive warming of shelf sediment, gas
hydrate destabilization, and methane release.
The processes leading to permafrost and gas
hydrate destabilization on the Arctic continen-
tal shelf have received little attention. Scien-
tific drilling of destabilized permafrost and gas
hydrate accumulations would greatly benefit
characterization of the distribution of gas
hydrate in the Arctic shelf sediments and the
thermal and hydrogeological processes that
control methane release. Boreholes would
provide vital clues to the interplay between
permafrost-associated gas hydrate in Arctic
shelf sediments and global climatic change.
The APPG recommends drilling a suite of 3 to
4 holes across the Arctic shelf into a destabi-
lized permafrost-associated gas hydrate
accumulation to characterize active processes
of methane release. The boreholes would
extend from an outer position at the former
limit of permafrost to an inner position where
permafrost has been virtually preserved (e.g., a
possible on-land reference site). Drilling
objectives would include investigations of:
1. The distribution of permafrost, solid gas
hydrate and free gas;
2. The nature of the thermal regime;
3. Active gas transport processes and fluxes,
and
4. Development of models of methane release
from destabilized permafrost-associated gas
hydrate accumulations.
Other biogeochemical cycles, such as the silica
cycle, also should be investigated in the
context of regional and global climate change.
Little is known about these elements and their
record of nutrient flux in the Arctic Ocean
(Aagaard et al., 1999).
STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESSFUL
SCIENTIFIC DRILLING IN THE ARCTIC
Context
In the context of the Integrated Ocean Drilling
Program (IODP), scientific drilling in the
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
15
Panel Reports
ODPIODP
Arctic can be accomplished only by an alter-
nate, mission specific platform. Neither the
present ODP drillship JOIDES Resolution nor
the riser and the non-riser vessels proposed for
the IODP will ever penetrate into the perma-
nently ice-covered areas of the deep polar
basin. Furthermore, since operations will be
restricted to summer months and because of
the wealth of scientific problems that need to
be addressed in the Arctic Ocean, a dedicated
effort over 10 to 20 years is required.
More extensive geophysical site surveys of
potential drilling targets are needed urgently.
Underway geophysical surveys in the Arctic
Ocean carried out from both surface icebreak-
ers and from submarines during the past
decade have considerably improved our
knowledge of the principal features of the
Arctic sea floor. This activity needs to continue
in order to provide the detailed geophysical
foundation from which the best scientific
drilling targets can be selected. These site
survey data need to be shared throughout the
scientific community. Successful science is
thus dependent on a flourishing program of
marine geophysical surveys in the Arctic.
Jurisdiction
Five coastal states, Canada, Greenland (Den-
mark), Norway, the Russian Federation and the
United States of America, border the Arctic
Ocean. A large portion of the Arctic Ocean lies
within the 200 nm jurisdiction of these states.
However, no maritime boundaries have yet
been agreed to in the Arctic between adjacent
states, and to date only two of the five Arctic
coastal states (Norway [1996] and Russia
[1997]) have ratified the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
.
Environmental Issues
The sensitivity of low-temperature environ-
ments to oil pollution is recognized in Article
234 of UNCLOS (Taagholt, 1992). In addition
to these governmental bodies, environmental
non-governmental organizations (NGOs) also
are deeply concerned about the Arctic environ-
ment. It is clear that any scientific drilling
programme in the Arctic Ocean must emphati-
cally state that it has nothing to do with oil
exploration and that the environmental impact
of riserless scientific drilling is negligible.
Pollution Prevention
For over 30 years, DSDP and ODP have
maintained an unblemished record with respect
to pollution. No blowouts or accidental re-
leases of hydrocarbons into the sea have
occurred from drilled wells.
Since scientific drilling objectives in the Arctic
Ocean are mainly paleoceanographic and
paleoclimatological, proposed drill sites are
likely to be of shallow penetration (<500
mbsf). This reduces the risk of hydrocarbon
flows.
Management Issues
Management tasks for high-Arctic drilling
operations will include:
• Seek coastal state approvals as necessary.
• Manage budgets and maintain auditable
accounts.
• Select contractors for ice management,
drilling operations, core handling and
curation.
• Negotiate contracts.
• Monitor contracts and pay for work done.
• Invite scientific participants.
• Identify safety issues and develop contin-
gency plans.
• Define operational plans and establish lines
of responsibility.
• Organize logistics.
• Arrange insurance policies (Government
backing may be needed, as with ODP).
• Submit appropriate reports to funding
agencies and to the scientific community.
• Interact with international environmental
organizations.
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING16
Panel Reports
ODPIODP
Management will need to include personnel
experienced in Arctic ice management, drilling
operations, core handling, and project manage-
ment/contracting to carry out the aforemen-
tioned tasks. These tasks cannot be relegated to
a transitory committee of experts.
Short-term Strategy
A top-rated science proposal (533) for drilling
the Lomonosov Ridge already exists. This
proposal will be dealt with further by the
recently established Arctic Detailed Planning
Group (DPG).
Drilling within the permanently ice-covered
regions of the Arctic should continue with
operations on the periphery of the Arctic ice
pack where some site survey data already
exists, but for which drilling proposals have
yet to be submitted. The approach adopted for
these early legs will be to:
1. Use existing technology and ice manage-
ment techniques already developed for
drilling in ice-covered areas;
2. Ensure that many sites are available, over a
considerable geographical area. This will
prevent the operation from failing because
of difficult ice conditions at just a few sites;
and,
3. Ensure that adequate site surveys are
available for all, including back-up, sites.
Long-term Strategy
In order to achieve the scientific goals of an
Arctic drilling program, at least a decade of
drilling is required. This long-term strategy
assumes that a long-term funding commitment
to Arctic drilling exists.
The long-term strategy will build on the results
of the first drilling legs in the Arctic ice pack.
Indeed, learning from earlier legs will be
essential to the success of the whole program.
TECHNOLOGY FOR ARCTIC DRILLING
The general requirements for a drilling plat-
form capable of operating in Arctic sea-ice
areas include:
1. Dynamic positioning (DP);
2. High Arctic ice-class rating;
3. An adequate moon pool with a reinforced
deck capable of supporting a drill rig. A
dedicated drilling vessel will have an
integral derrick and heave-compensated
drilling capability. Alternatively, suitable
vessels of opportunity can be equipped with
portable, heave-compensated marine drilling
rigs on a project-by-project basis;
4. The facility needs to be equipped with a
suitable coring system, and have sufficient
deck space for drilling, coring, logging
equipment, and tools;
5. Provision for modular laboratory containers
for core curation and safety assessment , as
a minimum, and for services (water, fuel,
power, etc.). Other modular (containerized)
laboratories on a project-by-project basis
could include physical properties, geochem-
istry, micropaleontology, and microbiology;
6. Sufficient accommodation for crew and
scientists; and,
7. Helideck and other appropriate navigation
and safety features for Arctic work.
Potential Platforms
Platform candidates that meet these require-
ments include:
1. Drilling vessel or barge: Dynamically
positioned ice-class vessel or barge with a
moonpool and at least a 100-ton capacity,
heave-compensated, drill rig. This vessel
will require support by one or more
icebreaker(s).
2. Icebreaker-based platform (Fig. 3): A
portable, heave-compensated drill rig
installed on a dynamically positioned
icebreaker with a moon pool.
3. Ice -supported drill rig: A portable drill rig
transported by an icebreaker or by air and
installed on land-fast (non-moving) ice.
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
17
Panel Reports
ODPIODP
Coring and Logging System
The selection of one of the following coring
systems will depend on scientific objectives,
water, and borehole depth and the type of
drilling platform:
1. ODP system: A unique heavy-duty offshore
scientific coring system with abilities to
operate from oil field size DP drill vessel
(e.g., JOIDES Resolution).
2. Geotechnical marine coring systems,
including the “Piggy-back”option used on
geotechnical DP drill vessels and other
platforms (e.g., Bucentaur).
3. Complete Coring System (CCS), designed
for Russian deep ocean scientific drilling,
that can operate from geotechnical type or
oil-field DP vessels.
4. “Baikal”- Nedra coring system, based on
ODP and CCS techniques, that has been
used from a drilling barge in Lake Baikal.
5. DOSECC/Cape Roberts-style systems:
Hybrid, specially-designed mining-style,
multi-string systems used in scientific
coring.
In the short-term (3 to 5 years), technology
should allow high-performance, high-resolu-
tion coring using single-bit drilling. Proposed
operations include hydraulic piston sampling
in ooze and soft clays, hydropercussion
sampling in sands or silty clays, and rotary
coring. Other coring technology compatible
with single-bit operations should be part of the
system (e.g., “Piggy-Back”/nested coring
system, downhole motor coring, HYACE or
PCS sampling). A mining-style system could
be operated through the secondary drill string.
A portable wireline logging system compatible
with the coring system and anticipated bore-
hole diameter is required. This system should
include a winch, cable, and data acquisition
unit. The basic logging requirements will be
the same as in the ODP program. The logging-
while-drilling (LWD) system needs to be
considered on a project-by-project basis.
Site Survey Needs
Despite substantial efforts, including the
SCICEX program of the U.S. Navy, to collect
seismic reflection data in the past decade, the
geophysical database for the entire Arctic
Ocean is scarce. Exceptions are selected
sections of the Yermak Plateau, Lomonosov
Ridge, and the Chukchi Plateau (Fig. 1). The
use of multiple platforms (surface and subma-
rine) of complementary capabilities should be
employed for site and exploratory surveys.
In preparation for a long-term drilling program
in the high-Arctic, the APPG urgently recom-
mends acquisition of new geophysical data of
adequate extent and depth of penetration to
support drillsite definition.
Figure 3. Conceptual
drawings of two
icebreakers with drilling
rigs. Both have been
discussed briefly by the
Arctic PPG as potential
alternate platforms for
ocean drilling in the
Arctic Ocean.
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING18
Panel Reports
ODPIODP
Ice Management
Drilling in drifting ice demands careful plan-
ning. Several companies have extensive
experience in “Stationary Marine Operations in
Drifting Ice” (STAMARDI), particularly in
offshore Sakhalin (Okhotsk Sea) and in the
Beaufort Sea. One main consideration is the
maximum allowable lateral vessel movement.
This parameter determines how much time is
available for operational decisions to be made
(i.e., response time). In order to manage ice
during a STAMARDI, at least one primary and
one secondary icebreaker are required.
The appropriate ice management system can
be modelled by combining icebreaker perfor-
mance models, ice regime modification
models, and ice drift-force models.
Operational Flexibility
The following operational approach would
maximize the chances of success:
1. A multi-vessel approach is required for
operational flexibility and safety.
2. Arctic operations will require larger than
normal fuel capacity (perhaps double).
3. Alternate drill sites should be approved
because the primary drill site may not be
accessible. It is likely that the sites drilled
will be heavily influenced by ice conditions.
4. An appropriate ice management plan.
FUTURE TECHNOLOGICAL
DEVELOPMENTS
Although technology exists to perform deep-
water drilling in ice-covered regions, there is a
need for particular developments for a long-
term drilling commitment in the central deep
Arctic, where the drilling targets of the highest
scientific priorities are located. These develop-
ments may comprise several different systems,
including remotely operated vehicles and
submarines. APPG focused only on a new,
conventional, surface vessel system.
Available barges and large icebreakers are
either very cumbersome in operation (often
lacking proper DP), or are too small for
scientific work in difficult ice conditions. Thus
a new large research icebreaker with a deep-
water drilling capability is needed. In summer,
the vessel will provide an alternate platform
for Arctic deep drilling, with a derrick and a
lab-stack to be mobilized for each season.
Such a vessel will guarantee a commitment to
a continuous Arctic deep-drilling program, and
be a potential contribution to the IODP.
The APPG recommends the establishment of a
technical feasibility study for such a vessel,
which at present does not exist.
REFERENCES
Aagaard K., Darby D., Falkner, K., Flato, G.,
Grebmaier, J., Measures, C., and Walsh, J., 1999.
Marine Science in the Arctic: A Strategy, Arctic
Research Consortium of the United States
(ARCUS): Fairbanks, AK, p. 84.
Aagard, K., Swift, J.H., and Carmack, E., 1985.
Thermohaline circulation in the Arctic Mediter-
ranean Seas. J. Geophys. Res., 90, 4833-4846.
Azbel, A.Y., Akimetz, V.S., et al., 1991. Mesozoic
Foraminifera. In Azbel, A.Y. and Grigalis, A.A.
(Eds.), Practical Manual on Microfauna of the
USSR: Leningrad, Russia (Nedra Publishers,
Leningrad Division), 375 pp. [in Russian].
Bischof, J., and Darby, D., 1997. Quaternary ice
transport in the Canadian Arctic and extent of
Late Wisconsinan glaciation in the Queen
Elizabeth Islands. Can. J. Earth Sci., 36:2007-
2022.
Campbell, J.S., and Clark, D.L., 1977. Pleistocene
turbidites of the Canada Abyssal Plain of the
Arctic Ocean. J. Sed. Pet., 47:657-670.
Cavaleri, D.J., Gloersen, P., Parkinson, C.L.,
Comiso, J.C., and Zwally, H.J., 1997. Observed
hemispheric asymmetry in global sea ice
changes. Science, 278:1104-1106.
Clark, D.L., Byers, C.W., and Pratt, L.M., 1986.
Cretaceous black mud from the central Arctic
Ocean. Paleocean., 1 (3):265-271.
Darby, D.A., Bischof, J.F., and Jones, G.A., 1997.
Radiocarbon chronology of depositional regimes
in the western Arctic Ocean. Deep-Sea Res.,
44:1745-1757.
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
19
Panel Reports
ODPIODP
Darby, D.A., Naidu, A.S., Mowatt, T.C., and Jones,
G.A., 1989. Sediment composition and sedimen-
tary processes in the Arctic Ocean. In Y. Herman
(Ed.), The Arctic Seas: Climatology, Oceanogra-
phy, Geology, and Biology: New York, NY (Van
Nostrand Reinhold), 657-720.
Grantz, A., Phillips, R.L., and Jones, G.A., 1999.
Holocene pelagic and turbidite sedimentation
rates in the Amerasian Basin, Arctic Ocean from
radiocarbon age-depth profiles in cores.
GeoRes. Forum, 5:209-222.
Hall, J., 1979. Sediment waves and other evidence
of paleo-bottom currents at two locations in the
deep Arctic Ocean. Sed. Geol., 23:269-299,
Hedinger, A., 1993. Upper Jurassic (Oxfordian-
Volgian) foraminifera from the Husky Forma-
tion, Aklarik Range, District of MacKenzie,
Northwest Territories. Bull. Geol. Surv. Can.,
439:1-173.
Hellebrand, E., Muehe, R., and Snow, T.E., in press.
Mantle melting beneath the Gakkel Ridge
(Arctic Ocean): Abyssal peridotite spinel
composition. Chem. Geol.
Jackson, H.R., 1985. Seismic reflection results from
CESAR. In Jackson, H.R, Mudie, P.J., and
Blasco, S.M. (Eds.), The Canadian Expedition to
study the Alpha Ridge. Geol. Surv. Can. Paper
84-22:19-24.
Jakobsson, M., Cherkis, N.Z., Woodward, J., and
Coakley, B., 2000. New grid of Arctic bathym-
etry aids scientists and mapmakers. EOS Trans.
Am. Geophys. Union, 81(9):89, 93, 96.
Jokat, W. (Ed.), 1999. Arctic ’98: The Expedition
ARK-XIV/1a of RV Polarstern in 1998,
Berichte zur Polarforschung, 308:159 pp.
Jokat, W., Stein, R., Rachor, E., Schewe, I., and the
Shipboard Scientific Party, 1999. Expedition
gives fresh view of Central Arctic Geology,
EOS Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 80 (40):465,
472-473.
Jokat, W., Uenzelmann-Neben,G., Kristoffersen, Y.,
and Rasmussen, T., 1992. ARCTIC ´91:
Lomonosov Ridge - a double sided continental
margin, Geology, 20:887-890.
Kassens, H., Bauch, H., Dmitrenko, I., Eicken, H.,
Hubberten, H.-W., Melles, M., Thiede, J., and
Timokhov, L. (Eds.), 1999. Land-Ocean Systems
in the Siberian Arctic: Dynamics and History:
Berlin, Germany (Springer-Verlag), 711 pp.
Kvenvolden, K.A., and Grantz, A., 1990. Gas
hydrates of the Arctic Ocean region in The
Arctic Ocean Region. In The Geology of North
America, 7: Boulder, Colorado (Geological
Society of America), 539-550.
Lyle, M., 1997. Could early Cenozoic thermohaline
circulation have warmed the poles?
Paleoceanog., 12:161-167.
Max, M.D., and Lowrie, A., 1992. Natural gas
hydrates: Arctic and Nordic sea potential. In
Vorren et al. (Eds.), Arctic Geology and Petro-
leum potential. Spec. Publ. 2, Norwegian
Petroleum Soc.: Amsterdam, Netherlands
(Elsevier), 27-53.
McNeil, D.H., 1989. Foraminiferal zonation and
biofacies analysis of Cenozoic strata in the
Beaufort-MacKenzie Basin of Arctic Canada.
Geol. Surv. Can. Paper 89-1G:203-233.
McNeil, D.H., 1997. New foraminifera from the
Upper Cretaceous and Cenozoic of the Beaufort-
MacKenzie Basin of Arctic Canada. Spec. Pub.,
Cushman Found. Foram. Res., 35:1-95.
Muehe, R. and Jokat, W., 1999, Recovery of
Volcanic Rocks from the Alpha Ridge, Arctic
Ocean: Preliminary Results. EOS Trans. Am.
Geophys. Union, 80 (46):1000.
Muehe, R., Bohrmann, H., Garbe-Schoenberg, D.,
and Kassens, H., 1997. E-MORB glasses from
the Gakkel Ridge (Arctic Ocean) at 87oN:
Evidence for the Earth’s most northerly volcanic
activity. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 152 (1-4):1-10.
Phillips, R.L., and Grantz, A., 1997. Quaternary
history of sea ice and paleoclimate in the
Amerasia basin, Arctic ocean, as recorded in the
cyclical strata of Northwind Ridge. Geol. Soc.
Am. Bull., 109 (9):1101-1115.
Proshutinsky, A., and Johnson, M., 1997. Two
circulation regimes of the wind driven Arctic
Ocean. J. Geophys. Res., 102:12, 493-12, 514.
Polyak, L., Lehman, S., Gataullin, V., and Jull, A.J.,
1995. Two-step deglaciation of the southeastern
Barents Sea. Geology, 23:567-571.
Spicer, R.A., Ahlberg, A., Herman, A.B., Kelley,
S.B., and Rees, P.M., 1999. Mid-Cretaceous
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
20
TheTransition
Period
ODPIODP
The Proposal Process During the ODP-IODP Transition
Keir Becker (Director, JOIDES Office) and Ted Moore (Co-Chair, iPC)
One of the greatest strengths of the Ocean
Drilling Program (ODP) is the drilling pro-
gram selection process based on JOIDES panel
and peer review of proposals freely submitted
by interested geoscientists. A principal func-
tion of the JOIDES Office and Advisory
Structure is/has been to coordinate the receipt
and review of proposals from the community
interested in scientific ocean drilling. The
Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP) is
envisioned to carry on this proposal-driven
tradition, with proposal processing and review
initially coordinated by the Interim Science
Advisory Structure (iSAS) and iSAS Office
described later in this issue. Given that the
iSAS will phase in during 2001, but JOIDES
will continue through 2003, how will the
proposal process transition be coordinated?
WHAT HAPPENS TO CURRENT JOIDES
PROPOSALS?
The final year of JOIDES Resolution ODP
operations will be scheduled at the August
2001 SCICOM/OPCOM meetings. Proposals
submitted after the October 1, 2000 JOIDES
proposal deadline could not fulfill the review
process in time for consideration at the August
2001 meetings, so proposal submissions
dropped considerably for the March 15, 2001
proposal deadline. But there had been a large
upsurge of proposal submissions during 1999/
2000, and there are many more strong propos-
als active than could possibly be scheduled in
ODP. Proponents of these proposals will be
offered the option to transfer their proposals to
the interim IODP planning process, and the
JOIDES Office and iSAS Office will work
closely to coordinate the transfer of files.
The transfer process for all proposals will be
initiated during the summer of 2001, when the
iSAS Office is formally opened and the
staffing of the iPC and iSSEPs is complete.
The exception is the proposal subset that is
being forwarded to SCICOM in August 2001
but is not scheduled for the final year of ODP
operations. For this group the process will be
initiated shortly after the August, 2001
SCICOM meeting. Any transfer must first be
approved by the proponents, so the iPC co-
chairs and iSAS Office will contact proponents
of JOIDES proposals for their permission to
transfer the proposal files from the JOIDES
Office to the iSAS Office for review by the
iSAS. In addition, all proponents will be
offered the opportunity to revise or amend
North Polar vegetation and climate: A high
resolution study. J. Conf. Abs., 4(1):224.
Stein, R. (Ed.), in press. Circum Arctic Paleo-River
Discharge and Its Geological Record, Int. J.
Earth Sci.
Stein, R., Nam, S.-I., Schubert, C., Vogt, C.,
Fuetterer, D., and Heinemeier, J., 1994. The last
deglaciation event in the eastern central Arctic
Ocean. Science, 264:692-696.
Stein, R., and Fahl, K., 2000. Holocene accumula-
tion of organic carbon at the Laptev Sea conti-
nental margin (Arctic Ocean): Sources, path-
ways, and sinks. Geo-Mar. Lett., 20(1):27-36.
Taagholt, V., 1992. International Law of the Sea - in
an Arctic Perspective. Nordic Arctic Research
on Contemporary Arctic Problems. In Proc.
Nordic Arctic Res. Forum 1992: Aalborg,
Norway (Aalborg University Press).
Vogt, P.R., Taylor, P.I., Kovacs, L.C., and Johnson,
G.L., 1979. Detailed aeromagnetic investigation
of the Arctic Basin. J. Geophys. Res., 84:1071-
1089.
Zachos, J. C., Pagani, M., Sloan, L. C., Thomas, E.,
and Billups, K., submitted. Trends, rhythms,
and aberrations in global climate: 65 Ma to
present. Science.
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
21
TheTransition
Period
ODPIODP
Table 2: Timetable in
2001 for implementation
of the interim Science
Advisory Structure (iSAS)
to support IODP
transition planning.
Table 1: Overwhelmed
by all these acronyms?
Use the guide below to
decipher JOI/ODP and
iSAS/IODP abbreviations.
JOI - Joint Oceanographic Institutions
JOIDES - Joint Oceanographic Institutions for
Deep Earth Sampling
ODP - Ocean Drilling Program
NSF - National Science Foundation
JR - JOIDES Resolution
EXCOM - Executive Committee
SCICOM - Science Committee
BCOM - Budget Committee
OPCOM - Operations Committee
TEDCOM - Technology & Engineering
Development Committee
SSP - Site Survey Panel
PPSP - Pollution Prevention & Safety Panel
SCIMP - Scientific Measurements Panel
ESSEP - Science Steering & Evaluation Panel -
Earth’s Environment
ISSEP - Science Steering & Evaluation Panel -
Earth’s Interior
PPG - Program Planning Group
DPG - Detailed Planning Group
USSSP - United States Science Support Program
CMO - Central Management Office
iDPG - interim Detailed Planning Group
IODP - Integrated Ocean Drilling Program
iPC - interim Planning Committee
iPPSP - interim Pollution Prevention & Safety Panel
IPSC - IODP Planning Sub-Committee
iSAS - interim Science Advisory Structure
iSCIMP - interim Scientific Measurements Panel
ISP - Initial Science Plan for the IODP
iESSEP - interim Science Steering & Evaluation Panel-
Earth’s Environment
iISSEP - interim Science Steering & Evaluation Panel-
Earth’s Interior
iSSP - interim Site Survey Panel
IWG - International Working Group
IWGSO - International Working Group Support Office
JAMSTEC - Japan Marine Science & Technology Center
MEXT - Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports,
Science & Technology
MOU - Memorandum of Understanding
OD21 - Ocean Drilling in the 21st Century (Japan)
SAS - Science Advisory Structure (IODP)
JOIDES/ODP ACRONYMS iSAS/IODP ACRONYMS
Formation of interim Science Advisory Structure (iSAS) for IODP
To support IODP transition planning during
2001-2003, an interim Science Advisory
Structure (iSAS) and iSAS Office are being
established in 2001. The iSAS structure
parallels the JOIDES Advisory Structure
(Table 1), with an interim Planning Committee
(iPC) analogous to the JOIDES SCICOM, and
interim Science Steering and Evaluation Panels
(iSSEPs) analogous to the JOIDES SSEPs.
Likewise, there will be an interim Site Survey
Panel (iSSP) and interim Scientific Measure-
ments Panel (iSCIMP). Plans are underway for
a counterpart to the JOIDES TEDCOM. There
will not be an IODP analogue to EXCOM until
formation of the IODP SAS in 2003.
The mandates for the iSAS panels have been
approved by IWG and are posted at the IODP
their proposals in line with the IODP Initial
Science Plan and any new guidelines estab-
lished for IODP proposals.
NEW PROPOSALS FOR THE IODP
It is planned that the publication of the IODP
Initial Science Plan (ISP) in May of 2001 will
trigger a formal call for IODP proposals in
early summer, roughly coincident with the
opening of the iSAS Office. Just as active
ODP proposals are evaluated in the context of
the ODP Long-Range Plan, IODP proposals
will be evaluated in the context of the IODP’s
ISP. Many common scientific themes carry
over from the LRP to the ISP, but emphases are
different and IODP obviously will involve
more drilling platforms than the riserless drill
ship that exemplifies nearly all ODP programs.
IODP proposal requirements for programs on
the IODP riserless drill ship will probably not
be significantly different from current ODP
proposal requirements, but IODP proposal
requirements for riser drillship programs or
mission-specific platforms will need further
development in the IODP Call for Proposals.
Hence, in many cases, proponents of proposals
carried over from ODP will probably want to
amend or revise their proposals when transfer-
ring them to the iSAS and its Office.
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
22
TheTransition
Period
ODPIODP
Nomination Process for iSAS
Early in 2001, the co-chairs of IWG formally
requested that JOIDES and the OD21 Science
Advisory Committee work together to “form
iSAS as a joint working group representing the
two organizations,” with a membership
reflecting the ideal future contributions to
IODP, i.e., approximately 1/3 U.S.A., 1/3
Japan, and 1/3 other countries and consortia.
The response to this request was governed by
motion 01-1-5 of the JOIDES Executive
Committee (see minutes posted on the JOIDES
web site, http://joides.rsmas.miami.edu) and a
corresponding, but subtly different, Consensus
01-1-01 of the OD21 Science Advisory Com-
mittee. During February to March of 2001,
Japanese nominations to iSAS were put forth
web site, www.iodp.org. The timeline for
establishing iSAS is presented in Table 2. A
key difference between the JOIDES Advisory
Structure and iSAS is that iSAS will group and
rate IODP proposals, but neither rank them nor
finalize the IODP drilling schedule. As of
October 1, 2003, when IODP Memoranda of
Understanding (MOU) are in place, the iSAS
is expected to change into a Science Advisory
Structure (SAS) for IODP, which will then
build on the work of iSAS to create initial
IODP schedules.
iSAS IMPLEMENTATION: 2001 TIMELINE
January • Approval of draft iSAS Panel Mandates by International
Working Group (IWG)
February - • JOIDES and OD21 advisory structure nominate members
March for the following committees and panels:
1) interim Planning Committee (iPC);
2) interim Science Steering & Evaluation Panel - Earth’s
Environment (iESSEP);
3) interim Science Steering & Evaluation Panel - Earth’s
Interior (iISSEP);
4) interim Site Survey Panel (iSSP)
April • iSAS Office established
• JOIDES and OD21 consult with IWG regarding iSAS panel
and committee membership
May • Nominated iSSEP members attend JOIDES SSEP meeting
as observers
June • Official start of iSAS;
• Panel membership established;
• Public Call for IODP proposals
July • iSSP members attend JOIDES SSP meeting as observers
August • First Official Meeting of iPC
• iPC members attend JOIDES SCICOM/OPCOM meeting as
observers
• iPC/iPSC develop mandate for interim Pollution Prevention
and Safety Panel (iPPSP) and discuss needs and mandates
for new Industry/Technology liaison panel
• Nominate iPPSP members
November • Joint meeting of iSSEPs and SSEPs
• Establish iPPSP, members attend JOIDES PPSP meeting as
observers
December • iPC establish first riser Interim Drilling Planning Group (iDPG)
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
23
TheTransition
Period
ODPIODP
by the OD21 advisory structure. The EXCOM
motion recommended that iSAS nominees be
from members of corresponding JOIDES panels
wherever possible, and nominations from the
U.S.A. and other IWG members were
solicited by the JOIDES Office from national
ODP committees. Leaders of JOIDES and
OD21 worked closely to ensure reasonable
balance of expertise among the final list of
nominations, which was forwarded to IWG in
early May of 2001 for approval at their June
2001 meeting.
Just as the JOIDES Advisory Structure is
supported by the JOIDES Office, an iSAS
Office has been established to support the
IODP planning of iSAS. The iSAS Office, at
JAMSTEC headquarters, is under the direction
of Dr. Minoru Yamakawa, and assisted by two
Science Coordinators (Drs. Nobuhisa Eguchi
and Jeffrey Schuffert) and additional staff.
The responsibilities of the iSAS Office are:
• Support of all iSAS panel activities, includ-
ing administrative support to iPC, logistical
support for all iSAS meetings, and produc-
tion of the iSAS web page;
• Tracking of the IODP proposal review
process, including receiving and tracking of
Formation of an iSAS Office
IODP proposals, ensuring timely communi-
cations between proponents and iSAS
during the review process, developing
proposal review forms, and coordinating
the anonymous external reviews for pro-
posals forwarded for such review by the
iSSEPs;
• Publishing a newsletter chronicling IODP
planning and development; and
• Maintaining close communications among
the JOIDES Office, JOI, the IWGSO, and
the OD21 Office.
Contact information for the iSAS Office is
provided below.
MAILING ADDRESSJapan Marine Science and Technology Center2-15 Natsushima-cho, Yokosuka-city 237-0061JAPAN
EMAIL [email protected]
WEBSITE ADDRESShttp://www.iodp.org/isas
FAX NUMBER+81-468-66-5351
Dr. Hajimu KINOSHITAJAMSTECTel: +81-468-67-5524Email: [email protected]
iPC (interim Planning Committee) CO-CHAIRS
OFFICE STAFF
Administrator:Dr. Minoru YAMAKAWAAdvisor to the Director, OD21 ProgramTel: +81-468-67-3791Email: [email protected]
Science Coordinator:Dr. Nobuhisa O. EGUCHITel: +81-468-67-5562Email: [email protected]
Science Coordinator:Dr. Jeff D. SCHUFFERTTel: +81-468-67-5562Email: [email protected]
Administrative Assistant:Noriko TSUJITel: +81-468-67-5562Email: [email protected]
Another staff member to be named
Prof. Ted MOOREUniversity of MichiganTel: +1-734-763-0202Fax: +1-734-763-4690Email: [email protected]
iSAS OFFICECONTACTINFORMATION
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
24
TheTransition
Period
ODPIODP
Call for Proposals: The Integrated Ocean Drilling Program
A new international scientific ocean drilling program will begin in October
2003. Drilling proposals are now being accepted by the interim Science
Advisory Structure (iSAS) of the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP).
Proposals to IODP should address the scientific themes spelled out in the IODP InitialScience Plan (now on the Internet at http://www.iodp.org). Proponents should indicate
how the proposed ocean drilling will significantly advance scientific understanding of the Earth processes that
comprise these broad themes.
The IODP plans to make the following types of drilling platforms available to proponents in support of the
scientific ocean drilling objectives given in the Initial Science Plan:
1. A non-riser, dynamically positioned drillship similar to the JOIDES Resolution, but with enhanced laboratory
facilities and capable of drilling in nearly all oceanic water depths.
2. A dynamically positioned drill ship with riser well control. Initially this ship will be limited to water depths
between about 500 to 2500 m. Drill string length will be approximately 10 km. On-board laboratory facilities
will be comparable to those on the non-riser ship (see further description of ship capabilities in the IODP
Initial Science Plan).
3. “Mission-specific platforms” will be made available to address scientific problems that cannot be drilled using
the two primary drilling platforms. Such missions might include drilling in very shallow waters or in ice-
covered areas. Laboratory facilities for such platforms will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
THE IODP PROPOSAL PROCESS AND REQUIRED FORMATS ARE GIVEN AT
http://www.iodp.org under the iSAS link.Proposals which do not adhere to these format guidelines will be returned to the lead proponent.
Initially, the Drill Site Designation Policy and Site Description Forms used in iSAS proposals
will be identical to those used by JOIDES. These guidelines and forms are available at
http://joides.rsmas.miami.edu/proposals/.
Deadlines for electronic submission of IODP proposals are 1 October and 15 March.
Proposals should be submitted electronically to the iSAS Office at [email protected].
They will be accepted as one PDF file that includes all text, figures and forms.
NOTE: Please specify the software system used to produce the PDF file, and ensure the file will print using
Acrobat Reader 4.0 (available at http://www.adobe.com). Proposals that cannot be printed at the iSAS
Office will be returned to the lead proponent, and may result in the proposal deadline being missed.
Proponents who are unable to submit proposals electronically may submit ten (10) copies of a paperversion (with all figures and forms) by mail to the iSAS Office at the following address. An electronic version
of the proposal abstract, in RTF (rich text file) format, also is required. This abstract may be submitted
on disk by regular mail or by email to [email protected].
iSAS Office
Japan Marine Science and Technology Center
2-15 Natsushima-cho,
Yokosuka-city 237-0061 JAPAN
Deadlines for the submittal of paper-copy IODP proposals are 1 September and 15 February.
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
25
TheTransition
Period
ODPIODP
Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP) PrinciplesApproved by the International Working Group (IWG) on 17 January 2001
Final versions of the following IODP principles
were accepted at the Southampton, U.K., meeting
of the International Working Group (IWG) on 17
January 2001. The Management Structure is a
draft version and is not included here.
IODP IMPLEMENTATION PRINCIPLES
Schedule
1. IODP will begin officially on 1 October 2003.
Membership and Program implementation will
be effective from this date.
2. The first year of the program will be spent in
detailed planning activities and preparing for
drilling operations (engineering development,
detailed site surveys, etc.). Operation of the
non-riser vessel will begin in 2005 . Riser
vessel operations will begin in 2006.
Interim Science Advisory Structure (iSAS)
1. An interim Science Advisory Structure (iSAS)
for IODP will be organized in June 2001 and
will exist until 1 October 2003. ISAS will be a
joint working group representing JOIDES and
the OD21 Science Advisory Committee. The
purpose of iSAS is to continue scientific
planning for IODP.
2. Membership on iSAS committees will be
nominated by JOIDES and the OD21 Science
Advisory Committee. Representation on the
committees and panels of iSAS is expected to
be proportional to the optimal international
participation in IODP (1/3 Japan, 1/3 United
States, 1/3 other IWG members). JOIDES and
the OD21 Science Advisory Committee are
expected to confer and consider appropriate
disciplinary balance and expertise in making
their nominations.
3. An interim Planning Committee (iPC) will
serve as the highest level committee and
management authority for the iSAS and is
expected to oversee and implement iSAS
activity. Representation on iPC will be chosen
from IWG members who are, in principle,
seeking full IODP membership. The iPC will
be responsible to the IWG for its guidance and
direction and will report to the IWG. IPC
will be co-chaired by the chairs of iPSC
and the OD21 Science Advisory Commit-
tee.
4. IPC will encourage the international
community to submit drilling proposals
for IODP. The proposals will be examined
and reviewed by iSAS, but final evalua-
tion, ranking and scheduling will be
conducted by the formal IODP Science
Advisory Committee which will be
established on 1 October 2003.
5. IWG will request iPSC to provide recom-
mendations on necessary committees and
panels for iSAS, a schedule for their
creation, and panel mandates by 1 January
2001.
6. ISAS committees are expected to meet in
conjunction with their equivalent JOIDES
committee.
IODP PROGRAM PRINCIPLES
1. The IODP is a scientific research program
with objectives identified in the IODP
Science Plan. The results of the Program’s
scientific and engineering activities will be
openly available.
2. The IODP is based on international
cooperation and sharing of financial and
intellectual resources.
3. Membership in the IODP is available to
government and/or national agencies (or
their representatives) which have an
interest and capability in geoscience
research.
4. The IODP will be guided by a science
advisory structure, composed of scientists
and engineers representing IODP mem-
bers. The IODP science advisory structure
will establish the appropriate panels to
provide advice to IODP management on
platforms and science operations.
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
26
TheTransition
Period
ODPIODP
5. The operation of two ocean drilling vessels
(riser-capable vessel and non-riser vessel)
presently constitutes the core capability of
the IODP.
6. The IODP will seek substantive cooperation
with other earth and ocean sciences pro-
grams and initiatives.
7. Program costs will be determined by the
IODP Lead Agencies (presently the National
Science Foundation (NSF) and Ministry of
Education, Culture, Sports, Science and
Technology (MEXT)). The Lead Agencies
will contribute equally to Program costs.
Program costs are composed of platform
operations costs and science operations
costs1. Platform operations costs of the two
primary vessels are to be the responsibility
of MEXT and NSF. Mission specific plat-
form operation costs will be the responsibil-
ity of the member(s) providing the platform.
Members in the IODP (including MEXT and
______________________________________1 Platform Operations Costs will support the basic
operation of the vessel as a drillship, and will
include, for example: (1) costs of the drilling and
ship’s crew, (2) catering services, (3) fuel, vessel
supplies and other related consumables, (4)
berthage and port call costs, (5) disposal of wastes,
(6) crew travel, (7) inspections and insurance, (8)
drilling equipment, supplies, and related
consumables, (9) administration and management
costs of the platform operators.
Science Operation Costs will provide for those
activities onboard program platforms necessary to
the proper conduct of the scientific research
program and those shore-based activities required to
properly maintain and distribute samples and data,
support seagoing activities, and administer and
manage the program. These costs will include, for
example: (1) technical services, (2) computer
capability, (3) data storage and distribution, (4)
description, archiving, and distribution of data and
samples, (5) deployment of a standard suite of
logging tools, (6) development of new drilling tools
and techniques required by IODP research, (7)
program publications, (8) costs of consumables
(exclusive of those identified under platform
operations costs), (9) costs required for administra-
tion and management, including the Central
Management Office, (10) engineering or geophysi-
cal surveys required for hole design or evaluation of
drilling safety during final site selection.
NSF) will contribute financially to support
of the science operations costs.
8. Support of scientific research and develop-
ment costs for shore-based analysis and
research on IODP samples and data, and for
non-routine downhole measurements, are
the responsibility of member countries/
agencies. Support of geophysical and
geological research to prepare drilling
proposals or identify drilling targets are also
the responsibility of member countries/
agencies.
IODP MEMBERSHIP PRINCIPLES
1. Membership in the IODP is available to
government and/or national agencies (or
their representatives), which have an
interest and capability in geoscience
research.
2. Membership will be secured through
signing of a memorandum of understanding
between the government and/or national
agency (or representative), MEXT and NSF.
3. Lead Agencies of the IODP, (presently
MEXT and NSF), will have equal member-
ship rights and responsibilities. Lead
agencies will contribute core capabilities to
the Program. Lead agencies will contribute
equally to total Program costs.
4. An IODP Council will provide governmen-
tal oversight for all IODP activity. All
countries, as well as member organizations
representing countries, participating in the
IODP will be represented on the Council.
5. Members will have the right to: (1) partici-
pate in all drilling cruises, (2) be repre-
sented on all planning and advisory panels,
(3) be represented on IWG or its successor,
(4) have access to data, samples, scientific
and technical results. (5) Submit proposals
to the advisory structure for drilling or
engineering developments in support of
IODP science, (6) etc.
6. Members will have the responsibility to: (1)
actively participate in all aspects of the
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
27
TheTransition
Period
ODPIODP
IODP, (2) ensure publication and sharing of
scientific results, (3) participate in providing
data and proposals for planning of drilling
programs, (4) etc.
7. Based on present projection of total annualProgram costs ($130-140M) for a two
drilling vessel program, the financial
contribution for membership in the IODP
will be $5 million/year. Financial contribu-
tions from international partners will be
comingled to support science operations
costs. This contribution will entitle a
member to one participation unit, with one
participation unit equivalent to one member
per panel and two scientific participants per
“cruise leg,” or equivalent. More than two
participants on a cruise leg may be accept-
able as offset by reduced participation in
other legs. A member may acquire addi-
tional participation units through a corre-
sponding increase in financial contribution,
and/or long-term provision of mission
specific platforms. It is understood that the
Lead Agencies will contribute equally to
total Program cost and acquire additional
participation units necessary to fully support
the program. When the Program is estab-
lished, associate membership status will be
considered.
8. Membership will be based on a 10-yearcommitment, in principle, to participation in
the IODP.
IODP PRINCIPLES ON DRILLING
PLATFORMS
1. The operation of two drilling vessels (risercapable vessel and non-riser vessel) pres-
ently constitutes the core capability of the
IODP. The riser capable platform will be
made available by MEXT and will be
owned and operated by JAMSTEC, and the
non-riser platform by the NSF.
2. Legal and financial responsibility includingmobilization and platform operation costs
for the riser-capable vessel will reside with
Japan, and for the non-riser vessel with the
United States.
3. Access to mission specific platforms(beyond the two primary vessels) will be
required to meet specific objectives identi-
fied by the science advisory structure, but
resources to support these activities have not
been identified at this time.
4. Legal and financial responsibility, includingmobilization and platform operation costs of
mission specific platforms, is to reside with
the organization(s) or country (ies) which
make the decision to offer this additional
capability to the Program. Provision of such
a capability will not be considered a contri-
bution in lieu of annual IODP membership
contribution.
5. IODP comingled program funds will beused to support costs of science operations
on IODP drilling platforms.
6. International participation in the science andoperations of all IODP drilling platforms
will be consistent with IODP program
procedures.
Thorseth, I.H., Torsvik, T., Furnes, H., and
Muehlenbachs, K., 1995. Microbes play an
important role in the alteration of oceanic crust.
Chem. Geol.,126:137-146.
Thorseth, I.H., Pedersen, R.B., Daae, F.L., Torsvik,
V., Torsvik, T., and Sundvor, E., 1999. Microbes
associated with basaltic glass from the Mid-
Atlantic Ridge. Conf. Abstr., 4:254.
Torsvik, T., Furnes, H., Muehlenbachs, K.,
Thorseth, I.H., and Tumyr, O., 1998. Evidence
for microbial activity at the glass-alteration
interface in oceanic basalts. Earth Planet. Sci.
Lett., 162:165-176.
West, B.P., 1997. Mantle flow and crustal accretion
in and near the Australian-Antarctic Discor-
dance. Doctoral Dissertation, University of
Washington, Seattle, 145 pp.
West, B.P., Sempéré, J.-C., Pyle, D.G., Phipps-
Morgan, J., and Christie, D.M., 1994. Evidence
for variable upper mantle temperature and
crustal thickness in and near the Australian-
Antarctic Discordance. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.,
128:135-153.
Leg 187 Report Continued from Page 6
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
28
MeetingReports
ODPIODP
SUMMARY
The Ocean Drilling Program (ODP) has
successfully drilled scientific objectives
around the globe with the JOIDES Resolution
(JR) drillship since 1985. Scientists recognize
that a substantially refitted JR, or a replace-
ment vessel with similar capabilities, cannot
achieve every scientific objective identified in
the Initial Science Plan (ISP) for the Integrated
Ocean Drilling Program (IODP), which
succeeds ODP in 2003. Some of these objec-
tives, such as drilling of the seismogenic zone,
will be addressed by the Japanese OD21 deep-
riser vessel currently under construction.
However, geographical, bathymetric, and
mechanical limitations will persist with either
proposed vessel.
To address these technical challenges, ESCOD,
the European Steering Committee on Ocean
Drilling hosted a workshop on Alternative
Platform Drilling technology in Brussels,
Belgium from January 8-9, 2001. Alister
Skinner of the British Geological Survey and
Jeroen Kenter of the Free University of
Amsterdam co-chaired the meeting. Attendees
included international marine earth scientists
and representatives of the hydrocarbon drilling
and service industries, the geotechnical drilling
industry, and platform operators.
Industry’s key message to the academic
community is that almost all of the apparently
problematic drilling environments can be
cored, provided that the correct vessels,
technologies, and planning strategies are used.
A clear understanding of scientific priorities
and dialogue between drillers and scientists is
essential to the development of successful
drilling proposals. Improved results can be
expected for shallow water drilling and,
possibly, deep drilling in hard rock formations
at various water depths.
_______________________________________________________1 UK ODP Programme Manager, British Geological
Survey, Keyworth, Nottingham, NG12 5GG,
United Kingdom
TECHNICAL CHALLENGES FACING
IODP AND INDUSTRY ANSWERS
Presentations of IODP science objectives by
scientists were followed by open comment and
discussion sessions. Industry representatives
suggested how current and future technological
and implementation approaches would allow
these objectives to be achieved. The impor-
tance of continuous coring, unusual in most
oilfield operations but common in mining
boreholes, was a surprise to many in the oil
industry, and helped focus the technical
discussions.
Three restrictions on IODP operations not
addressed by either a refitted JR, a replacement
non-riser vessel, or the Japanese OD21 riser
vessel, are:
1. Geographical: The ice strengthening of the
JR is adequate for summer operations in
some areas of broken ice, but is insufficient
to allow drilling in ice-covered high latitude
locations such as the Arctic. The highest
ranked proposal currently within the ODP
proposal system is for drilling along the
Lomonosov Ridge in the Arctic Ocean.
2. Bathymetric: The JR is probably not the
most suitable platform for drilling opera-
tions in less than 40 to 57 m water depth or
in reef areas close to shore; this includes a
significant portion of the continental
shelves. These areas are vital targets for key
ISP objectives of passive margin and
climate research.
3. Mechanical: The riserless design of the JR
leads to problems with spudding boreholes
into and maintaining borehole condition in
hard seafloor substrates (e.g., basalts, hard
rock breccias, or coral limestones), sand-
rich horizons on margins, and glacial
sediments. Only minimal core has been
recovered in boreholes that penetrate highly
brecciated or unconsolidated material.
Alternate Drilling Platforms - Europe as the Third Leg of IODP
Andrew Kingdon1 (on behalf of the ESCOD group)
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
29
MeetingReports
ODPIODP
Industry representatives’ responses to these
limitations are summarized as follows:
The Arctic
Arctic Drilling Planning Group representatives
remarked that the principal problem presented
by the Lomonosov Ridge proposal is the need
for a multi-ship program that includes an ice-
strengthened and dynamically positioned
drilling vessel and two ice breakers. The 25 to
30 day resupply and refuelling cycle for ice
support vessels also is problematic. Industry
and ODP Canada participants discussed use of
existing platforms, and suggested possible
drilling strategies and resupply support vessels.
Shallow-Water Drilling: Sandy
Substrates and Coral Reefs
The need for scientific drilling through vol-
umes of unconsolidated sands and coral reefs
was widely discussed. ODP has repeatedly
struggled to maintain stable boreholes where
sand crops out at the sea bed, and has had great
difficulty achieving significant core recovery.
The geotechnical community stressed that
these problems, while not simple, are handled
routinely in industry by using appropriate
technology and planning strategies. The major
need, controlled weight on bit, may require a
heave-compensated conductor pipe or heave-
compensated sea bed reaction template plus
ancillary tools, all of which may be better
deployed from alternative platforms.
Innovative Drilling/Logging
Technologies and Approaches
Innovative technologies of significant potential
value to IODP include:
• Aluminum drill strings that allow use of
lighter-weight derricks and drilling plat-
forms than conventional steel drill strings;
• Simple, robust technologies, such as sub-sea
ice air bags to support the weight of the drill
rig and plastic risers to minimise weight,
used by the international Cape Roberts
drilling program in Antarctica;
• “Piggy-back” drilling, used in the Barents
Sea, uses two separate drill strings from a
single vessel, one inside the other, as an
alternative to conventional risers. The outer
drillstring effectively acts as a riser for the
inner one which performs the actual drilling;
• Containerized “jack-up” rigs that can be
sent anywhere in the world, and assembled
on the beach in two days by six people; and,
• Advances in logging tool designs and
geophysical log acquisition; NMR logging,
LWD (logging-while-drilling), “wireline
logging without wirelines”, and new
slimline logging tool technologies allow
even smaller diameter geotechnical bore-
holes to be logged to industry standards.
Logistics, Project Management,
Industry Data, and Collaboration
Industry participants agreed that a multi-
platform program is needed, and advised that
the complex logistics would require sophisti-
cated project management. This is routine in
industry but is less familiar to the academic
sector. BP-Amoco and Shell representatives
offered IODP access to industry seismic data to
depths of one second, including 3-D data, for
use in site surveys and planning. The need for
joint industry/academic projects to drive the
new program was reiterated.
WHAT NEXT?
A detailed report of the Brussels meeting is
being prepared. An inventory of industry
drilling equipment, techniques and suitable
vessels is being compiled. The inventory will
be made available as a planning resource for
IODP and the scientific ocean drilling commu-
nity., and will likely be posted on the Joint
European Ocean Drilling Initiative (JEODI)
website (www.jeodi.org).
Scientists will be encouraged to write propos-
als addressing IODP ISP objectives at the
Alternate Platform Drilling Conference
(APLACON), in Lisbon, Portugal on May 10-
12, 2001. This meeting, the successor to the
CONCORD (deep-riser drilling) and COM-
PLEX (non-riser drilling) meetings, will result
in drilling pre-proposals to be submitted to
iSAS(interim Science Advisory Structure) at
the normal 1 October proposal deadline.
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNINGNews
&Announcements
30
ODPIODP
The JOIDES Journal shares the ODP’scommitment to actively seek communication andcollaboration with other national and international
geoscience initiatives. The Journal will highlight theseprograms in order to inform the ODP community
of their goals and objectives.
The MARGINSResearch Initiative
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/margins
The National Science Foundation's MARGINS research initiative, driven by the Earth Science community,seeks to understand the complex interplay of processes that govern continental margin formation andevolution. Funding is provided by NSF-OCE, NSF-ODP and NSF-EAR. Research projects span onshore andoffshore study regions, and address lithospheric deformation, magmatism and mass fluxes, sedimentation,and fluid flow. The goal of the MARGINS program is to provide a focus for the coordinated, interdisciplinaryinvestigation of these processes and is based on four, broad initiatives:
• Seismogenic Zone Experiment • Rupturing Continental Lithosphere• Subduction Factory • Sediment Dynamics and Strata Formation
Each of these initiatives is associated with focus sites, geographic research locations selected by the com-munity to host a complete range of field, experimental and theoretical studies, over the full range of spatialand temporal scales, needed to formulate and address fundamental questions associated with each of theinitiatives. Scientific drilling will be used with other tools to help map and define the geological characteris-tics of the focus sites by providing sediment and basement ages and physical properties, basement fabric,sediment facies, fluid flow regimes, and paleo-environment. ODP and IODP are thus important programs forthe successful testing of MARGINS hypotheses.
All four MARGINS initiatives are now positioned to receive proposals. The next MARGINS-NSF deadline is 1November, 2001. For more information, visit the MARGINS web site: http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/margins.
• A portfolio of drilling targets in Arctic waters• A technical strategy for deep coring in ice-
covered regions• A report on integration of joint strategies with the
International Continental Drilling Program (ICDP)• Information brochures on the European role in
scientific ocean drilling• An educational outreach program for IODP in
Europe
For more information, visit the JEODI website:http://www.jeodi.org
• A European science component to the internationalobjectives for scientific ocean drilling
• Definition of the political structure and fundinggeometry for a European consortium in ocean drilling
• Technical requirements for a Mission SpecificPlatform (MSP) program in IODP
• Drilling targets and experiments for scientific oceandrilling using MSPs
• Proposals, cost estimates, and a managementstructure for shore-based laboratories and facilities inEurope as part of an international program
Joint European OceanDrilling Initiative (JEODI) http://www.jeodi.org
JEODI, a thematic network of all European member states involved in scientific ocean drilling, is funded bythe European Community. JEODI aims to bring the following to the IODP:
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNING
31
News&
Announcements
ODPIODP
A session (T70) on ophiolites, titled“Ophiolites as Problem and Solution in the Evolution of Geological Thinking”,
will be held at theAnnual Meeting of the Geological Society of America,
November 1-10, 2001Boston, MA USA
For more information on the book and the meeting, visit http://www.geosociety.org
Ophiolites and Oceanic Crust: New Insightsfrom Field Studies and the Ocean Drilling Program
Edited by Yildirim Dilek, Eldridge Moores, Don Elthon, and Adolphe NicolasGeological Society of America Special Paper 349, 466 pages, ISBN 0-8137-2349-3
Are you organizing a meeting, conference, or workshop of interest to the ocean drilling community?
We will include an announcement in the next JOIDES Journal editionif you send us information at least a month in advance of
our May 1 and November 1 publication dates.
EMMM 2002 - Third International Congress on EnvironmentalMicropaleontology, Microbiology and Meiobenthology
EMMM 2002 is the third in
a series of conferences
organized by the Interna-
tional Society of Environ-
mental Micropaleontology,
Microbiology, and Meio-
benthology (ISEMMM),
Institute of Paleontology
(Vienna, Austria), and the
Avalon Institue of Applied
Science (Winnipeg, Canada).
September 1-6, 2002 Vienna, Austria http://www.isemmm.org
Presented papers will be published
in a special volume of a newly esta-
blished peer-reviewed journal,
Environmental Micropaleontology,
Microbiology and Meiobenthology.
Meeting details will be available
at http://www. isemmm.org. To be
put on the mailing list, or for more
information, please contact:
Dr. Irena Motnenko
Technical Director, EMMM 2002
P.O. Box 60013, 110-2025 Corydon,
Winnipeg, Manitoba R3P 2G9, CANADA
Email: [email protected]
Phone: +1 (204) 489 4569 (Winnipeg)
Fax: +1 (204) 489 5782 (Winnipeg), or +43-1-4277 535 63 (Vienna)
New
Book!
Meeting
Announcement!
JOIDES Journal - Volume 27, No. 1
PLANNINGNews
&Announcements
32
ODPIODP
Where in the World is the JOIDES Office?
GUIDELINES FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE JOIDES JOURNAL
The JOIDES Journal is a forum for news exchange within the international JOIDES communityon scientific, technological, and planning developments. Before writing an unsolicited article,please contact the JOIDES Office to discuss whether it is appropriate for that particular issue.Information regarding news or meeting announcements can be sent without prior approval at leastone month before the May 1 and November 1 publication dates.
Scientific Contributions (Recent Leg Reportsand Post-Cruise Results) should focus on themajor highlights of recently completed legs or post-cruise studies. The text should be 1500-2000 words,and contain not more than 10 references and threefigures that are clearly relevant to the article.
Technology articles should focus on technologicalinnovations being developed for use within theOcean Drilling Program and their geologicalapplications. Avoid specialized terminology wherepossible, or provide brief and clear explanations ofspecific terms. Content and length requirements areas described for Scientific Contributions.
Planning articles include discussion of JOIDESpolicies, workshop reports and Steering Committeeactivities. Text length should be 250-1000 words.
Meeting Announcements should be brief state-ments, not exceeding 100 words, with the meetinggoals, location and dates, and full address of acontact person.
ELECTRONIC SUBMISSIONREQUIREMENTS
We will accept electronic submissions if both textand figures are in common formats (e.g., MS Word;Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop, etc.). Send twoelectronic copies of the text and figures, with yourname and complete contact information, to theJOIDES Office and Henny Gröschel at the follow-
ing email addresses:[email protected] (Tel: 305-361-4668)[email protected] (Tel: 305-361-4903).
Large graphic files may be made available on ananonymous ftp server at your institution, or sent bymail on a CD or Zip disk. In addition, please fax (to(305) 361-4632) or mail a clean black and whitelaser copy of each figure.
Text files should be saved in two formats: 1) theprogram in which the article was generated (pleasespecify), and 2) text only, preferably as a rich textformat (RTF) file.
Figure formats of choice are Adobe Illustrator EPSand Adobe Photoshop, at a resolution of 300 dpi. Ifyou are using other graphic programs, please savethe files in EPS or TIFF format, and specify theprogram. Contact us if you have questions on filecompatibility. Do not send low-resolution GIF files.
Figures should be composed in black and whitewith one additional color, if desired (0-100%shading is possible). If your graphics program letsyou specify PANTONE colors, use PANTONE2738 CVP as a secondary color. Full color figureson the front and back covers of the JOIDES Journalare now acceptable to JOI, and we will gladlyconsider CMYK color figures from submittedarticles.
Figures should be sized to the two column formatadopted by the Miami JOIDES Office. Maximumwidths are 7.6 cm (3 in) for one column, or 18.8 cm(7.4 in) for figures that may extend into the outsidemargin. Submit photographs in either black andwhite or color, and label clearly with your nameand address if you mail the photos.
Photo, bottom left:
Attendees of the recent
SCICOM and OPCOM
meetings, held from
March 20-23, 2001 at
Tongji University in
Shanghai, China.
Meeting hosts from
Tongji University are on
the far left, as follows:
Prof. Pinxian Wang,
front row; Prof. Zuyi
Zhou, second row; and
Dr. Lei Shao, back row.
Photo, bottom right:
The ODP and IODP
booths traveled to the
European Union of
Geosciences annual
meeting in Strasbourg,
France from April 8-12,
2001. Staffers included,
from left, Henny
Gröschel and Elspeth
Urquhart (JOIDES
Office), Betsy Fish
(IWGSO), and Max
Shinano (IWGSO/
JAMSTEC).
Figure 2. Ba vs. Zr/Ba plot used to discriminate
Indian and Pacific mantle domains onboard
JOIDES Resolution. Fields are defined from a
0-7 Ma dredge sample collection. Squares are
Pacific-type drilled samples. Lighter circles are
Indian-type drilled samples. Triangles are
Indian-type samples that plot slightly outside
the 0-7 Ma Indian field. These samples were
treated separately during the leg and confirmed
as Indian by onshore Pb analyses (D. Pyle,
unpub. data). Heavy circles are zero-age
samples from Segment B5 of the Australian-
Antarctic Discordance (AAD).
Figure 3. Site locations in relation to the residual
depth anomaly (gray contours) and SeaBeam
bathymetry from the Boomerang 05 site survey
cruise of R/V Melville. As confirmed by onshore
Pb isotopic analyses (D. Pyle, unpub. data),
lighter arrows (e.g., Site 1158) indicate sites with
Pacific-type isotopic signatures, and darker
arrows (e.g., Site 1157) are of Indian type. Site
1153 is transitional (after Christie et al., 1998).
DR 11 is a transitional-type dredge from Lanyon
et al. (1995).
Leg 187 Science Report:Mantle Dynamics and MantleMigration along the Australian-Antarctic Discordance
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 10 20 30 40 50Ba (ppm)
Zr/
Ba
(ppm
)Zone A propagating
rift �tip lavas
Pacific Field
Indian Field
In this issue from pages 3 - 6:
ODP CONTRACTORS
Joint Oceanographic
Institutions (JOI)
Prime Contractor
Program Management
Public Affairs
JOIDES Journal Distribution
1755 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20036-2102 USA
Tel: (202) 232-3900
Fax: (202) 462-8754
Email: [email protected]
http://www.oceandrilling.org
JOIDES Office
Science Planning and Policy
Proposal Submission
JOIDES Journal Articles
Marine Geology & Geophysics
Rosenstiel School of Marine and
Atmospheric Science
University of Miami
4600 Rickenbacker Causeway
Miami, FL 33149-1031 USA
Tel: (305) 361-4668
Fax: (305) 361-4632
Email:[email protected]
http://joides.rsmas.miami.edu
Ocean Drilling Program
(ODP) - TAMU
Science Operations
Leg Staffing
ODP/DSDP Sample Requests
ODP Publications
Texas A&M University
1000 Discovery Drive
College Station, TX 77845-9547 USA
Tel: (409) 845-2673
Fax: (409) 845-4857
Email: [email protected]
http://www-odp.tamu.edu
ODP - LDEO
Wireline Logging Services
Logging Information
Logging Schools
Log Data Requests
Borehole Research Group
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory
P.O. Box 1000, Route 9W
Paslisades, N.Y. 10964 USA
Tel: (914) 365-8672
Fax: (914) 365-3182
Email: [email protected]
The JOIDES Journal is printed and distrib-
uted semi-annually by Joint Oceanographic
Institutions, Inc., Washington, D.C., for the
Ocean Drilling Program under the sponsor-
ship of the National Science Foundation and
participating member countries. The
material is based upon research supported
by the National Science Foundation under
prime contract OCE-9308410.
The purpose of the JOIDES Journal is toserve as a means of communication among
the JOIDES advisory structure, the National
Science Foundation, the Ocean Drilling
Program, JOI subcontractors thereunder,
and interested Earth scientists. Any opin-
ions, findings, conclusions or recommenda-
tions expressed in this publication are those
of the author(s) and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the National Science
Foundation.
The information contained within theJOIDES Journal is preliminary and privi-
leged, and should not be cited or used
except within the JOIDES organization or
for purposes associated with ODP. This
journal should not be used as the basis for
other publications.
Editor & Designer: Henrike Gröschel
Published semi-annually by the:
JOIDES Office
Division of Marine Geology & Geophysics
Rosenstiel School of Marine and
Atmospheric Science
University of Miami
4600 Rickenbacker Causeway
Miami, FL 33149-1031 U.S.A.
Tel: (305) 361-4668 / Fax: (305) 361-4632
JOIDESJournal
ODP Site Survey Data Bank
Site Survey Data Submission
Site Survey Data Requests
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory
P.O. Box 1000, Route 9W
Paslisades, N.Y. 10964 U.S.A.
Tel: (914) 365-8542
Fax: (914) 365-8159
Email: [email protected]
ODP/IODP TRANSITION
Integrated Ocean Drilling
Program (IODP)
http://www.iodp.org
Interim Science Advisory
Structure (iSAS) Office
Japan Marine Science and
Technology Center
2-15 Natsushima-cho,
Yokosuka-city 237-0061 JAPAN
Tel: +81-468-67-5562
Fax: +81-468-66-5351
Email: [email protected]
http://www.iodp.org/isas
International Working Group
Support Office (IWGSO)
1755 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Suite 700
Washington, D.C. 20036-2102 USA
Tel: (202) 232-3900, Ext. 262 or 212
Fax: (202) 232-3426
Email: [email protected]
http://www.iodp.org